Just over two years ago, I gave a talk on climate skeptics and included in passing the fact that the organization, the Science Media Centre, networked with known skeptics, including those from the LM crowd.

In the audience at the Royal Society of Chemistry event was science writer, Vivienne Parry, who is on the board of the SMC. Parry asked me to justify my comments and said, in an email “if you have any material which you think demonstrates bias, political/corporate pressure or whatever in relation to the SMC - send it to me, and we will discuss it at the next SMC board meeting.”

I sent the SMC a dossier of material on various aspects including the issue of bias, especially in relation to its work on climate and genetic engineering. My concerns were dismissed by the SMC’s board. In an email Alan Winter Chairman of the SMC board wrote “Whilst we note your concerns, we are reassured by the overwhelmingly positive feedback we have had about the Director and her team from the hundreds of leading scientists, press officers and journalists who make regular use of the Centre.”

Sadly for the SMC the ugly head of bias has surfaced again, but this time on nuclear power. Earlier this month, the British government gave the go ahead to a new generation of nuclear power plants. In response the SMC issued a press release, entitled “Major energy and engineering institutions support new nuclear build”. This was picked up by the Nuclear Industry Association which ran the same headline on its website.

However both the SMC release and the NIA follow up prompted a group of academics to write a contradictory statement entitled: “No consensus on new nuclear: Energy experts urge greater attention to the facts”.  It stated: “Despite pronouncements by several scientific bodies, there is no scientific consensus in favour of nuclear power.”

One of the scientists involved wrote to the SMC’s director Fiona Fox. The email has been leaked to SpinWatch. It reads: “It probably won't come as an enormous surprise to learn that the release you issued in support of nuclear power has caused considerable consternation within UKERC and in the wider academic community, particularly given the further embellishment provided through the quote in the version that runs on the NIA website. Many of us (members of several of the bodies on your statement) disagree with the statement. I am intrigued to learn why SMC felt it appropriate to participate in such an obviously partisan activity, and who instigated it.”

He was not the only one outraged by the SMC’s pro-nuclear statement. One of the organisations on the list of the SMC release was the UK Energy Research Centre. It has now taken the unprecedented step of issuing a press release stating:

“The UK Energy Research Centre (UKERC) regrets that its name became associated with a recent statement that can be interpreted as signalling UKERC's advocacy of nuclear power. We must underline that we are not pro- or anti- nuclear power or any other technology.”

Maybe the SMC’s board should look at the issue of bias once again...