5 ms·

> Do you, like me, consider them one of the most important venues on earth for people to be able to trust right now? How does it happen that the Washington Pos

> Do you, like me, consider them one of the most important venues on earth for people to be able to trust right now? How does it happen that the Washington Post publishes a quantum computing piece filled with errors that would embarrass a high-school student doing a term project (and we won’t even count the reference to Stephen “Hawkings”—that’s a freebie)? I'd recommend reading the Washington Post with a bit more skepticism. You're only noticing their mistakes on this article because it's something you're familiar with, but they make many mistakes in their other articles too. You probably just don't pick it up as you're not an expert in those other fields, and it sticks out in this one like a sore thumb because you are.

shaki-dora 9y ago
If you find factual errors in article by the Washington Post you can submit those on their website. The policy is spelled out at https://www.washingtonpost.com/policies-and-standards/?utm_term=.5f4ed5bc94c3#correctionspolicy https://www.washingtonpost.com/policies-and-standards/?utm_t... and it includes provisions to correct errors across all channels of distribution, including alerts and social media posts. Corrections are prominently added at the top of the article. See https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2018/02/08/how-three-of-americas-biggest-companies-might-undo-decades-of-conservative-health-care-policy/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2018/... for an example.
- RyanZAG 9y ago
  That sounds like crowdsourcing the core focus of the business then. The ability of people to point out factual errors should be kept for small details, not the all too common practice of posting articles without first getting them checked by experts. Why should unpaid experts have to go and spend hours posting corrections of the articles in Washington Post? Washington Post should be finding and paying experts to do this pre-publication. There needs to be some level of quality control at the Washington Post if they want to keep their reputation -- which they have tarnished very poorly since their push for the Iraq War and the role they had to making that war happen.
ClintEhrlich 9y ago
You've just described the Gell-Man Amnesia effect: "Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect works as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward-reversing cause and effect. I call these the “wet streets cause rain” stories. Paper’s full of them. In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story-and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read with renewed interest as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about far-off Palestine than it was about the story you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know." - Michael Crichton, Why Speculate (26 April 2002)
- baking 9y ago
  What's particularly interesting is that Scott specifically says that "the Washington Post has been a leader in investigative journalism exposing Trump’s malfeasance" but anyone who has been following Seth Abramson knows that the Washington Post and the New York Times are still a huge part of the problem in keeping up with the whole Russia investigation.
  - shaki-dora 9y ago
    The Washington Post's most prominent claim to fame in that regard is David Fahrenthold's reporting on the Trump Foundation's various ethical (and probably legal) problems, including self-dealing (spending donated money for functions at his Golf Courses), misappropriations (buying a self-portrait from foundation money) and outright fraud (not paying out promised donations, lying about the amounts Trump himself contributes to the foundation) etc. His articles are at https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-a-fahrenthold/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-a-fahrenthold/ Regarding Seth Abramson, it's important to note that there is ample criticism of his rather sloppy methods. A nice summary of him and similar "independent journalists" is at https://thinkprogress.org/blue-detectives-collapse-trump-russia-a42a94537bdf/ https://thinkprogress.org/blue-detectives-collapse-trump-rus.... If ThinkProgress thinks some criticism of Trump may be too close to conspiracy theories than comfortable, it would seem to be rather suspect.

shaki-dora 9y ago

If you find factual errors in article by the Washington Post you can submit those on their website. The policy is spelled out at https://www.washingtonpost.com/policies-and-standards/?utm_term=.5f4ed5bc94c3#correctionspolicy https://www.washingtonpost.com/policies-and-standards/?utm_t... and it includes provisions to correct errors across all channels of distribution, including alerts and social media posts. Corrections are prominently added at the top of the article. See https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2018/02/08/how-three-of-americas-biggest-companies-might-undo-decades-of-conservative-health-care-policy/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2018/... for an example.

RyanZAG 9y ago
That sounds like crowdsourcing the core focus of the business then. The ability of people to point out factual errors should be kept for small details, not the all too common practice of posting articles without first getting them checked by experts. Why should unpaid experts have to go and spend hours posting corrections of the articles in Washington Post? Washington Post should be finding and paying experts to do this pre-publication. There needs to be some level of quality control at the Washington Post if they want to keep their reputation -- which they have tarnished very poorly since their push for the Iraq War and the role they had to making that war happen.

ClintEhrlich 9y ago

You've just described the Gell-Man Amnesia effect: "Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect works as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward-reversing cause and effect. I call these the “wet streets cause rain” stories. Paper’s full of them. In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story-and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read with renewed interest as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about far-off Palestine than it was about the story you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know." - Michael Crichton, Why Speculate (26 April 2002)

baking 9y ago
What's particularly interesting is that Scott specifically says that "the Washington Post has been a leader in investigative journalism exposing Trump’s malfeasance" but anyone who has been following Seth Abramson knows that the Washington Post and the New York Times are still a huge part of the problem in keeping up with the whole Russia investigation.
- shaki-dora 9y ago
  The Washington Post's most prominent claim to fame in that regard is David Fahrenthold's reporting on the Trump Foundation's various ethical (and probably legal) problems, including self-dealing (spending donated money for functions at his Golf Courses), misappropriations (buying a self-portrait from foundation money) and outright fraud (not paying out promised donations, lying about the amounts Trump himself contributes to the foundation) etc. His articles are at https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-a-fahrenthold/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-a-fahrenthold/ Regarding Seth Abramson, it's important to note that there is ample criticism of his rather sloppy methods. A nice summary of him and similar "independent journalists" is at https://thinkprogress.org/blue-detectives-collapse-trump-russia-a42a94537bdf/ https://thinkprogress.org/blue-detectives-collapse-trump-rus.... If ThinkProgress thinks some criticism of Trump may be too close to conspiracy theories than comfortable, it would seem to be rather suspect.