It's interesting that this case is very similar to the whole "muzzling of scientists and park rangers" controversy.
At basically any place of employment, you're not really allowed to say anything to the media without it being vetted by at least a manager/director or a PR person.
It really is a standard policy, which is clearly a good thing as we see in this particular instance. I just find it interesting the difference in reaction when it's something that's generally perceived as negative (religious lunatics) vs. something perceived as positive (science).
For the record, I think this guy is an idiot and fully deserved his firing.
|