A Weak Media Oversight

The story begins with a look into the archives of the National News Council (NNC), a nonprofit organization founded in 1973 to investigate media bias. Although well-intentioned, the NNC struggled with funding and was ultimately short-lived, closing its doors after just a decade. During its operation, individuals could lodge complaints about perceived media bias, an option that seems far-fetched today.

Stanton Friedman, who held degrees in physics from the University of Chicago and worked on classified projects for defense contractors, utilized this platform. After dedicating himself entirely to UFO research in 1970, he became increasingly frustrated with the media’s dismissive attitude towards the topic.

In December 1974, Friedman initiated a campaign against misleading press coverage regarding UFOs. He submitted a letter to the NNC, stating that reports on his presentations were “friendly but not entirely accurate.” He asserted that the media's treatment of UFOs was often “inadequate, inaccurate, inept, misleading, and devoid of redeeming qualities.”

The term "Cosmic Watergate," which Friedman employed to refer to government secrecy surrounding UFOs, first appeared in this correspondence.

The NNC's response was courteous yet uninspired, prompting Friedman to identify a specific case of bias. He settled on an article from the December 14, 1974 issue of TV Guide that featured an essay by Asimov.

Asimov's Provocative Piece

The TV Guide essay, titled “UFOs: Are They Visitors from Space — or Unreliable False Observations?”, showcased Asimov at the peak of his fame. His works had captivated audiences for decades, and he was widely regarded as a credible authority on scientific matters.

In his essay, Asimov presented a seemingly balanced examination of the possibility of extraterrestrial life, referencing the Drake equation but ultimately concluding that the odds of discovering alien civilizations were slim. He cited his friend Dr. J. Allen Hynek's long search for evidence without success, suggesting that the chances of finding answers were fifty-fifty.

Friedman, however, viewed Asimov's approach as emblematic of a misguided scientific methodology. Asimov dismissed eyewitness accounts of UFOs as “entirely unreliable,” equating them to tales of supernatural entities. This assertion ignited Friedman’s outrage, and he highlighted it in a letter sent to both TV Guide and the NNC.

In his correspondence to TV Guide’s executive editor, Friedman referenced a doctoral thesis by Herbert Strentz, which criticized media coverage of UFOs as “superficial” and “careless.” He argued that Asimov’s article exemplified these flaws and contended that the author had neglected to engage with the substantial body of research available on the topic.

Friedman further criticized Asimov for failing to acknowledge statistical analyses, such as those found in Project Blue Book Special Report 14, and he insisted that just because he had never directly observed certain phenomena, it didn’t mean they didn’t exist.

While Friedman’s efforts may have seemed futile after Asimov's article was published, his letters served as a passionate call for the media to take UFO research seriously. He offered to provide any supplementary materials from his own publications that could enhance the conversation.

The Conclusion of the Debate

The NNC’s response to Friedman was lackluster, as they insisted on needing more specific examples before pursuing any formal complaints. Consequently, the NNC archived the case as “No complaint filed.”

Interestingly, the NNC continued to monitor media coverage of UFOs. A review of the NBC program "UFOs — Do You Believe?" published in the New York Times echoed Asimov's sentiments, criticizing the sensationalism surrounding the subject.

The NNC received mixed reviews in subsequent weeks, with some outlets recognizing a shift in how scientists were beginning to take UFOs more seriously. Yet, the final addition to the NNC folder was a tabloid article claiming that psychics were spotting invisible UFOs, highlighting the ongoing struggle for credibility in the field.

Ultimately, Friedman’s attempts to advocate for scientific legitimacy in UFO reporting reflected a broader battle against the media’s tendency to trivialize the subject. Ironically, Asimov may never have been aware of the challenge posed to him. A public debate between the two could have fostered greater understanding.

Ongoing Challenges

Despite advances in public perception regarding UAPs/UFOs since 1974, there remains considerable work to be done. News media still often mock the subject, although there are signs that this attitude is changing.

More scientists are beginning to engage seriously with UFO research, a development that Friedman worked tirelessly to encourage throughout his life. He witnessed the gradual acceptance of the topic, especially as media attention grew around government programs like AATIP.

While Stanton Friedman has passed, his legacy continues to shape the conversation around UFOs, a field that still requires greater rigor and respect in its exploration.