Finally, acceptance of these messages and their generalization to broader and deeper conclusions are facilitated by the manner in which they are communicated, that is, as objective and scientific, as apolitical and non-ideological, and as informational rather than persuasive. Consistent with Duster’s thinking, Lynch and Condit (2006) found that the media tend to present scientific accounts of race and genetics positively and do not challenge these accounts. This approach buries social implications and deflects both public discussion and private consideration of the political and social issues involved. Duster (2003a:131) illustrates this phenomenon: Today, about as much [debate] as we get in the public sphere is a Nobel laureate in molecular genetics debating on public television . . . a “critic” who wants to shut down the gears of the new science technology. The former is going to “win” every time. By win, I mean that the discourse is always in terms of the medical, health, and scientific benefits, skewing the grounds upon which an informed debate about other social, cultural, and political questions can arise.
