4 ms·
If you are offended by a pop science magazine's over simplification of a topic that resides in a field you have some specialty understanding of, you clearly hav
by leecarraher 10y ago
If you are offended by a pop science magazine's over simplification of a topic that resides in a field you have some specialty understanding of, you clearly haven't been reading pop-sci magazines for very long. You have all the right in the world to be angry when this happens in a journal article, but you are reading American Scientist, not SODA.
- bbarn 10y agoYep. Let's not forget the massive benefit of this - introducing new minds to hard concepts. It doesn't need to be feature perfect and up to date with the latest ideas, just enough to make it interesting to the readers.
- x1798DE 10y agoI think that most people believe that popular science press covers science topics in a way that is simplified but mostly accurate (like the statement "there are 86,400 seconds in a day.", which is true enough, neglecting edge cases). The problem is that most popular science, in my experience, fundamentally misrepresents the issues at hand and the stuff that "should be" correct. It's misleading "anti knowledge" in many cases, not just a blurry outline of the topic at hand.