>I'm a believer that the cure for misinformation is more information. The idealist in me agrees with this wholeheartedly. I think it's true for people with a c

>I'm a believer that the cure for misinformation is more information. The idealist in me agrees with this wholeheartedly. I think it's true for people with a certain discipline in their thinking(i.e. scientists, academics and the like), who will always keep their convictions open to new information. But the vast majority of people don't operate that way. People get a certain narrative stuck in their head, and then they filter information to fit that. Plus, we have access to more information right now than any humans in history, yet the state of human knowledge is still dominated by rumors, myths, tall tales, and mystery. We have all this quasi-religious cognitive machinery and thousands of years of oral culture behind the evolution of our brains. Maybe rational scientific decisonmaking is an anomaly in human history, or even worse, just another myth? >We cover sports in a way that allows educated and casual observers to enjoy them and learn extreme amount of nuance. How do we apply the same lessons here? This is an interesting thought. The average American can watch a football play and break down incredibly complex concepts of what just happened. Arguments over what constitutes a "catch" during instant replay often spiral into downright philosophical territory. The difference is that sports happen really fast - and you can watch them live while drinking beer. Maybe we should turn science into a team sport and have them do it in an arena in front of 80,000 people. Bring out some cheerleaders, air all the pickup truck commercials, and Shakira can perform at halftime. The winner gets a big trophy.