3 ms·
Hmm, I don't think the headline is misleading in this case but i generally agree with you. It's easy to cherry-pick studies that support your position, and mayb
by anarbadalov 6y ago
Hmm, I don't think the headline is misleading in this case but i generally agree with you. It's easy to cherry-pick studies that support your position, and maybe even interpret them in dishonest ways. Perhaps a more accurate title here would say something about preprints being weaponized by conspiracy theorists, and why journalists shouldn't report on them — but the general public would likely not be familiar with preprints, and this title gets at the heart of it.
- necovek 6y agoOh, I wasn't complaining about this particular article — I was describing how I avoid running into the problem the article complains about (i.e. someone else interpreting the results of the study for me, thus influencing my opinion and behaviour) by going directly into the study (when available) myself :)