3 ms·
I think the idea is that we all make mistakes. The best we can do is admit them and learn from them, just like any other postmortem. Also, they did update the
by misterbowfinger 9y ago
I think the idea is that we all make mistakes. The best we can do is admit them and learn from them, just like any other postmortem.
Also, they did update the erroneous articles:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/lots-of-people-in-cities-still-cant-afford-broadband/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/lots-of-people-in-citie...
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-worst-internet-in-america/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-worst-internet-in-a...
- cpsempek 9y agoAlso, they did update the erroneous articles: Ah so they did, my mistake. I think the idea is that we all make mistakes. I am in total agreement, we all do make mistakes, and it's refreshing when people own up to them. I guess my main question still stands though. As a top-tier data journalism outlet, why was a data QA not performed prior to analysis, or, before publishing results? And if there was data QA performed, where did it fail? It just seems that they got bit by a time crunch to publish content amid the FCC repeal and sloppy analysis was the result.
- fjsolwmv 9y agoEveryone can do better. It's impossible to research every story from first principles of physics.
- taoistextremist 9y agoThey probably just didn't think of this possible flaw in data. I mean, it's not like the university researchers caught wind of any problem, either.