Junk science

Junk science is a term used to describe theories that claim to be scientific but fail to follow the Scientific Method. See pseudoscience.

Like many other ideological terms, there is often no general agreement as to which side of a debate constitutes "junk", and which "real" science. Debates on environmental and health issues seem particularly prone to this problem. Junk science is largely a result of the lack of factual verification by the modern media and by the consuming public. Publicity is easier to get if you publish outrageous claims.

Alleged abuse of the term

Critics such as John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton of PR Watch point out that the term "junk science" is often used to deride scientific findings which contradict the corporate goal of profit maximization. In their book Trust Us, We're Experts (2001, New York), they cite detailed examples of how industry has launched multi-million-dollar campaigns to position certain theories as "junk science", often failing to employ the scientific method themselves. For example, the tobacco industry has used the term "junk science" to describe research showing negative effects of smoking and second-hand smoke, through veiled industry-funded PR organizations such as the "Tobacco Institute Research Council" (p. 230). Another example for discrediting disliked scientific findings is a large industry campaign to "reposition global warming as theory, not fact" described in detail by Stauber and Rampton.

Spokespersons for corporations and government bureaucracies counter by saying that the scientific evidence used by their critics actually constitutes junk science and should not be used as a basis for policy.