4 ms·

I heard it this way once: You open the paper and read an article about your field. “This thing is crap, they got all the details wrong and are drawing ridiculo

I heard it this way once: You open the paper and read an article about your field. “This thing is crap, they got all the details wrong and are drawing ridiculous conclusions!” Then you click to the next article, about something else. “Wow, this is really fascinating. We need to do something about this!” ... I think this idea has a name, though I don’t remember it.

CiPHPerCoder 8y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect
- burlesona 8y ago
  Thank you!
- rhizome 8y ago
  Gell-Mann has to do with the contagiousness of poor logic, not the fact that there are stories you like and stories you don't.
- rjf72 8y ago
  This leads to a possibility I'd not considered before. Trust in the media has deteriorated extensively. This seemed logically attributable to the rise of the internet thus ostensibly creating a race to publish, and publish sensationally, like never before. But something that always bugged me is that distrust of the media is nothing new. Writing in 1807 Jefferson stated [1], "To your request of my opinion of the manner in which a newspaper should be conducted, so as to be most useful, I should answer, "by restraining it to true facts & sound principles only." Yet I fear such a paper would find few subscribers. It is a melancholy truth, that a suppression of the press could not more compleatly deprive the nation of it's benefits, than is done by it's abandoned prostitution to falsehood. Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. The real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in situations to confront facts within their knolege with the lies of the day. ... I will add, that the man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them; inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. He who reads nothing will still learn the great facts, and the details are all false." Yet in my own personal experience, the media seemed at the minimum 'better' before the internet. So what gives? Maybe there is a very simple explanation. What may have changed is that now the internet enables individuals to share their expertise (and the media's lack thereof). It's no longer just the man who is an expert in a field facing disillusionment, but rather now anybody at all that reads his testimony. In times past there was no way to get such messages out. In other words the internet did not create mediocrity in the media, but rather emphasized it loud and clear for all to bear witness to, even those who otherwise would have been none the wiser. [1] - http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendI_speechs29.html http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendI_spe...
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
tozeur 8y ago
Ah I’ve thought about this exact thing before! Glad to see a coined term for it.
arkades 8y ago
Keep this in mind every single time you read a piece about the American healthcare system.
burger_moon 8y ago
This idea has some legs but it also needs to fit context. When I come here and see comments on a subject about programming I know there will be people here who are very smart and knowledgable. However I also know to skip any thread about nutrition, fitness, politics, or anything not tech related basically on this site. If I said well the people who comment on here and the articles submitted here about fitness are mostly shit, why would I read their opinions about programming, then I'd miss out on a lot. Not all the writers on staff at any publication are going to be bad, but some will be or they will just be given a topic to write about which they are not familiar with, but are experts in a different field perhaps.
- wolco 8y ago
  You would be surprised by the level conversation around certain health topics.
- jononor 8y ago
  The the level of "bikeshedding" friendliness needs to be taken into account. "Everybody" feels they can have an informed opinion on fitness or nutrition, not the same for specialized technical topics. Some tech topics can be similar though when kept on the general level, like programming languages, editors/IDEs, and testing practices...
fgandiya 8y ago
I've heard about it too but I don't know what the solution would be. If a journalist was really knowledgeable about something they were writing, would they still be in journalism when their insight could fetch more elsewhere?
- burlesona 8y ago
  Journalists who know their stuff can make good money running a topical blog / journal. See Stratechery as an example.

CiPHPerCoder 8y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect

burlesona 8y ago
Thank you!
rhizome 8y ago
Gell-Mann has to do with the contagiousness of poor logic, not the fact that there are stories you like and stories you don't.
rjf72 8y ago
This leads to a possibility I'd not considered before. Trust in the media has deteriorated extensively. This seemed logically attributable to the rise of the internet thus ostensibly creating a race to publish, and publish sensationally, like never before. But something that always bugged me is that distrust of the media is nothing new. Writing in 1807 Jefferson stated [1], "To your request of my opinion of the manner in which a newspaper should be conducted, so as to be most useful, I should answer, "by restraining it to true facts & sound principles only." Yet I fear such a paper would find few subscribers. It is a melancholy truth, that a suppression of the press could not more compleatly deprive the nation of it's benefits, than is done by it's abandoned prostitution to falsehood. Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. The real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in situations to confront facts within their knolege with the lies of the day. ... I will add, that the man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them; inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. He who reads nothing will still learn the great facts, and the details are all false." Yet in my own personal experience, the media seemed at the minimum 'better' before the internet. So what gives? Maybe there is a very simple explanation. What may have changed is that now the internet enables individuals to share their expertise (and the media's lack thereof). It's no longer just the man who is an expert in a field facing disillusionment, but rather now anybody at all that reads his testimony. In times past there was no way to get such messages out. In other words the internet did not create mediocrity in the media, but rather emphasized it loud and clear for all to bear witness to, even those who otherwise would have been none the wiser. [1] - http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendI_speechs29.html http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendI_spe...

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

tozeur 8y ago

Ah I’ve thought about this exact thing before! Glad to see a coined term for it.

arkades 8y ago

Keep this in mind every single time you read a piece about the American healthcare system.

burger_moon 8y ago

This idea has some legs but it also needs to fit context. When I come here and see comments on a subject about programming I know there will be people here who are very smart and knowledgable. However I also know to skip any thread about nutrition, fitness, politics, or anything not tech related basically on this site. If I said well the people who comment on here and the articles submitted here about fitness are mostly shit, why would I read their opinions about programming, then I'd miss out on a lot. Not all the writers on staff at any publication are going to be bad, but some will be or they will just be given a topic to write about which they are not familiar with, but are experts in a different field perhaps.

wolco 8y ago
You would be surprised by the level conversation around certain health topics.
jononor 8y ago
The the level of "bikeshedding" friendliness needs to be taken into account. "Everybody" feels they can have an informed opinion on fitness or nutrition, not the same for specialized technical topics. Some tech topics can be similar though when kept on the general level, like programming languages, editors/IDEs, and testing practices...

fgandiya 8y ago

I've heard about it too but I don't know what the solution would be. If a journalist was really knowledgeable about something they were writing, would they still be in journalism when their insight could fetch more elsewhere?

burlesona 8y ago
Journalists who know their stuff can make good money running a topical blog / journal. See Stratechery as an example.