Unscientific

A London-based broadcasting ginger group, otherwise known as the BBC Trust, is at it again. A proposed review of BBC science output will have special assistants all round news, tv, radio and online, preparing stats long into the night designed to prove there's been more output - and it's better.

I'm not convinced the Trust's postbag is stuffed with complaints about the BBC's science coverage (second to none in the broadcasting world, asserted without the need for stats), except those driven by those with a different agenda - such as Biased BBC, and a range of Tory bloggers - who will try to drive the review to scrutinise the work of Roger Harrabin, David Shukman and Richard Black.

Let's hope the result of the 2010 election, if nothing else, cuts out this layer of quasi-academic, quasi-judicial scrutiny, and allows BBC editors to edit again. The science review is due to report in 2011.