3 ms·
Why? It offered an interesting, alternative interpretation of the same data. That seems valuable. In a normal journalism article this same opinion would probab
by xkjkls 9y ago
Why? It offered an interesting, alternative interpretation of the same data. That seems valuable.
In a normal journalism article this same opinion would probably be offered in the form of a quote by some competing economist, instead of directly, but the effect is the same.
- c3534l 9y agoIt wasn't based on the data. Nothing in the study suggested that opinion. It's simply the statement of a narrative. That's part of why I specifically mentioned "unsourced." The claim doesn't follow from anything the article meant to cover.
- wpietri 9y agoThe article contextualized the study in a broader base of knowledge. That's part of why they're so valuable to readers: they just don't rewrite the study's abstract; they write about the study from the viewpoint of somebody who knows the topic and can connect this one item to a broader understanding.