14 ms·

BBC Admits Its Famous ‘Women Write Better Code’ Story Was Fake News

32 points by walterclifford 10y ago

Latty 10y ago
This seems like a classic 'counter SJW' article - i.e: an angry counter at the supposed 'feminist oppressors'. The BBC overhyped a bit of research - this happens constantly with research. They take a study, misrepresent it's findings a little and make it sound bigger than it is. Doesn't make it right, but it's hardly 'fake news'. The story was reporting on a study that happened, and the content was - if a little quick to jump to conclusions - based on reality. The article has been corrected to "Github coding study suggests gender bias" - while different, clearly it's the same underlying story. Meanwhile, this article casually claims that the original title is wrong - not just an unsubstantiated claim: > While this is a possible conclusion, it is far from being the only, or in this case, the most accurate one. They claim there is a more accurate conclusion, which is... > In fact, the study authors themselves later admitted that they had left out a pretty crucial point from their analysis: their data also revealed that women coders are in fact “harder on other women than they are on men.” This is a point that doesn't refute the core idea, nor is it a conclusion to replace the given one, it's just another bit of data which the article appears keen to promote as though it is particularly important. Presumably because the author thinks this is some kind of 'men vs women' war and that 'women do it too' makes anything OK. Don't get me wrong, the original study has issues - without knowing how many pull requests 'should' have been approved (which is probably impossible to judge well), it's hard to say the meaning of increased rejections - maybe more rejections show better code because it is structure so that flaws are more obvious to a reader? Clearly, the original reporting of it has issues too - but this article seems drummed up to create anger. Unless you are getting equally angry at the other exaggerated research articles in equal measure, it seems targeted. Edit: Also on this website "Feminist Mother Rejects Infant Son Because of His Gender". This article talks about the piece "Having a son went from a dilemma to being the most valuable lesson of my life" - which talks about a mother who imagined having a daughter, found out she was having a son, and talks about the fear she had realising she was going to have to explain about feminism and women's issues, which she didn't know how to do. She then goes on to explain she got past this fear (before he was born) and resolved on how to teach him. The article from this site, however, talks about rejection and child abuse, makes her out to be a crazy woman that hates men - totally unfounded. I suggest reading both to see how much they twist that one: https://heatst.com/culture-wars/feminist-mother-rejects-infant-son-because-of-his-gender/ https://heatst.com/culture-wars/feminist-mother-rejects-infa... vs http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/news-and-views/opinion/having-a-son-has-gone-from-being-a-dilemma-to-teaching-me-the-most-valuable-lesson-of-my-life-20161220-gtex2e.html http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/news-and-views/opinion/havin... It's another example, to me, of a "counter SJW" movement that only ever seems to invent enemies. The only place I have ever seen or heard these 'crazy extremist feminists' they claim are everywhere is in the odd forum thread, hardly a real issue. Instead, it's mostly crazy interpretations of normal pieces dressed up to install a fear in men that women are somehow out to get them - not unlike the Daily Mail straight-white-christian-man fear that seems to have driven brexit/trump.
- Tycho 10y ago
  The twitter account @RealPeerReview may interest you.
- SamUK96 10y ago
  I think though that if an equivalent study found opposite results and the BBC wrote "Men write better code", there would be even far greatee uproar at how deliberately misleading that is. You invent an enemy (the linked article, "anti-SJW"), and then attempt to "brush off" what is clearly a misleading and likely agenda-fueled article, which as per the MSM definition is "fake news. Also be aware that your "brush-off" and "oh it's not that bad" argument is identical to "sexists" claiming the "wage gap" doesn't exist...the very people you clearly are opposed to by the sounds if it.
  - Latty 10y ago
    I never said that the BBC was right with what they posted - clearly it has issues. My issue is that they examine this one case in isolation in a way that is clearly meant to be misleading. I am not 'inventing an enemy' - please go look at the other posts on that site - there is a continual drip of articles about feminism, making feminists out to be crazy and aggressive, all of them highly misleading. This is just another example. Instead of 'oh look, another story where a journalist finds a bit of research and publishes with a massively overstated headline' it's 'those feminists are at it again, trying to trick us!'. They could have picked out a ton of these stories, or focused on the issue of research in general, but instead they pick this one because it suits their message. You can ignore the context completely, but it's clear what this is in context. If a paper constantly put on giant pictures of convicted black people (and only black people) on the front page with gory descriptions of what they did, we would call that out, because while technically true, it's clearly misleading. Likewise, this site constantly pumping out articles that imply that feminists are some kind of boogeyman out to get you is attempting to push an agenda, and that context matters when judging this article. I'm not saying "it's not that bad" - it's a real issue. I'm saying that it's not as bad as the article portrays, because it portrays it without the wider context that this happens all the time with all sorts of research. Fake news is a term I hate because it's so easy to throw around. I don't really like it being used by any 'side', because it doesn't help. Just as with the 'fake news' itself, calls of 'fake news' just get brushed off with "mine can't possibly be, I trust this source". The solution, as always, should be making the damn point about why it's wrong. Yes, getting people to listen is a problem, but falling back on screaming a catch-phrase doesn't seem like it'll help more.
rokosbasilisk 10y ago
discussion of original article https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11074587 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11074587

Latty 10y ago

This seems like a classic 'counter SJW' article - i.e: an angry counter at the supposed 'feminist oppressors'. The BBC overhyped a bit of research - this happens constantly with research. They take a study, misrepresent it's findings a little and make it sound bigger than it is. Doesn't make it right, but it's hardly 'fake news'. The story was reporting on a study that happened, and the content was - if a little quick to jump to conclusions - based on reality. The article has been corrected to "Github coding study suggests gender bias" - while different, clearly it's the same underlying story. Meanwhile, this article casually claims that the original title is wrong - not just an unsubstantiated claim: > While this is a possible conclusion, it is far from being the only, or in this case, the most accurate one. They claim there is a more accurate conclusion, which is... > In fact, the study authors themselves later admitted that they had left out a pretty crucial point from their analysis: their data also revealed that women coders are in fact “harder on other women than they are on men.” This is a point that doesn't refute the core idea, nor is it a conclusion to replace the given one, it's just another bit of data which the article appears keen to promote as though it is particularly important. Presumably because the author thinks this is some kind of 'men vs women' war and that 'women do it too' makes anything OK. Don't get me wrong, the original study has issues - without knowing how many pull requests 'should' have been approved (which is probably impossible to judge well), it's hard to say the meaning of increased rejections - maybe more rejections show better code because it is structure so that flaws are more obvious to a reader? Clearly, the original reporting of it has issues too - but this article seems drummed up to create anger. Unless you are getting equally angry at the other exaggerated research articles in equal measure, it seems targeted. Edit: Also on this website "Feminist Mother Rejects Infant Son Because of His Gender". This article talks about the piece "Having a son went from a dilemma to being the most valuable lesson of my life" - which talks about a mother who imagined having a daughter, found out she was having a son, and talks about the fear she had realising she was going to have to explain about feminism and women's issues, which she didn't know how to do. She then goes on to explain she got past this fear (before he was born) and resolved on how to teach him. The article from this site, however, talks about rejection and child abuse, makes her out to be a crazy woman that hates men - totally unfounded. I suggest reading both to see how much they twist that one: https://heatst.com/culture-wars/feminist-mother-rejects-infant-son-because-of-his-gender/ https://heatst.com/culture-wars/feminist-mother-rejects-infa... vs http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/news-and-views/opinion/having-a-son-has-gone-from-being-a-dilemma-to-teaching-me-the-most-valuable-lesson-of-my-life-20161220-gtex2e.html http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/news-and-views/opinion/havin... It's another example, to me, of a "counter SJW" movement that only ever seems to invent enemies. The only place I have ever seen or heard these 'crazy extremist feminists' they claim are everywhere is in the odd forum thread, hardly a real issue. Instead, it's mostly crazy interpretations of normal pieces dressed up to install a fear in men that women are somehow out to get them - not unlike the Daily Mail straight-white-christian-man fear that seems to have driven brexit/trump.

Tycho 10y ago
The twitter account @RealPeerReview may interest you.
SamUK96 10y ago
I think though that if an equivalent study found opposite results and the BBC wrote "Men write better code", there would be even far greatee uproar at how deliberately misleading that is. You invent an enemy (the linked article, "anti-SJW"), and then attempt to "brush off" what is clearly a misleading and likely agenda-fueled article, which as per the MSM definition is "fake news. Also be aware that your "brush-off" and "oh it's not that bad" argument is identical to "sexists" claiming the "wage gap" doesn't exist...the very people you clearly are opposed to by the sounds if it.
- Latty 10y ago
  I never said that the BBC was right with what they posted - clearly it has issues. My issue is that they examine this one case in isolation in a way that is clearly meant to be misleading. I am not 'inventing an enemy' - please go look at the other posts on that site - there is a continual drip of articles about feminism, making feminists out to be crazy and aggressive, all of them highly misleading. This is just another example. Instead of 'oh look, another story where a journalist finds a bit of research and publishes with a massively overstated headline' it's 'those feminists are at it again, trying to trick us!'. They could have picked out a ton of these stories, or focused on the issue of research in general, but instead they pick this one because it suits their message. You can ignore the context completely, but it's clear what this is in context. If a paper constantly put on giant pictures of convicted black people (and only black people) on the front page with gory descriptions of what they did, we would call that out, because while technically true, it's clearly misleading. Likewise, this site constantly pumping out articles that imply that feminists are some kind of boogeyman out to get you is attempting to push an agenda, and that context matters when judging this article. I'm not saying "it's not that bad" - it's a real issue. I'm saying that it's not as bad as the article portrays, because it portrays it without the wider context that this happens all the time with all sorts of research. Fake news is a term I hate because it's so easy to throw around. I don't really like it being used by any 'side', because it doesn't help. Just as with the 'fake news' itself, calls of 'fake news' just get brushed off with "mine can't possibly be, I trust this source". The solution, as always, should be making the damn point about why it's wrong. Yes, getting people to listen is a problem, but falling back on screaming a catch-phrase doesn't seem like it'll help more.

rokosbasilisk 10y ago

discussion of original article https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11074587 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11074587