4 ms·

I’ve always found the news from my trusted sources to be reasonable and accurate until it covers something I know about. Then it seems like a complete mess. Hu

I’ve always found the news from my trusted sources to be reasonable and accurate until it covers something I know about. Then it seems like a complete mess. Humans tend to trust the first thing they hear and we tend to be less skeptical about news media especially if they seem very confident or persuasive.

colordrops 6y ago
That's been true since journalism began as a profession.
partiallypro 6y ago
I've always felt that instead of J School, journalists should have majors in topics they are covering and a minor in journalism. When I was in college and worked for the school newspaper I tried hammering this to people, but all the journalism/media professors felt it was a bad idea, probably because it is such a threat to their profession.
- triceratops 6y ago
  > but all the journalism/media professors felt it was a bad idea, probably because it is such a threat to their profession. Why is it a threat to their profession? We'll still need journalists. and they'll still need training. This seems more like a hiring/staffing problem. Media outlets should start hiring more grads with double majors or non-journalism majors who can write.
- SkyMarshal 6y ago
  That would be ideal, but many people who major in those topics would likely go into careers doing those things, rather than journalism. However, journalism might make an excellent choice for when they retire but still want something socially impactful to do that leverages their long experience.
- jfengel 6y ago
  I feel the same way about computer science majors. (At least, the vast majority of them who go into programming, rather than pure theoretical computer science.) Aside from a tiny minority who get to write infrastructure, whose customers are other programmers, the vast majority of programmers will be employed in some domain. I'd rather see programmers have any outside experience... even literature or music or one of those other fields we often deride. The people who majored in that field are likely to be our customers, and when we don't know how they work, we won't be able to serve their needs. At the very least, every programmer should have a minor in some other field. (And ideally not everybody going into the same physics or math fields.)
timr 6y ago
"I’ve always found the news from my trusted sources to be reasonable and accurate until it covers something I know about. Then it seems like a complete mess." Same. This year, with the coverage of Covid (an area where I have a certain level of expertise), I've been bombarded with the extremely low quality level of essentially all of the major news providers. They are more than willing to amplify the most speculative voices, credulously, without even basic fact-checking. The ones that depend on advertising are the worst, overall. Writers with no subject-matter expertise will take a scary quote from a single source, won't bother to make even the simplest of efforts to verify the claim, and will publish it just to get the scoop. I won't mention names because I'll only be downvoted, but there are some extremely high-profile "scientific" media figures who are constantly broadcasting utter nonsense. And because they heard it from a "scientist" on the news, people will attack you if you rebut it. I am old enough to remember when journalists were skeptical of the people they interviewed, and the rule was that no fact was published without independent verification (read "All the President's Men" for example). 2020 is the year where the news media fell apart for me -- it is all simply entertainment now, which is unfortunate.
- glennpratt 6y ago
  > I won't mention names because I'll only be downvoted Unfortunately, I don't know you or trust you, so this post seems like more noise.
- wombatmobile 6y ago
  > I won't mention names because I'll only be downvoted Interesting choice you're making there - social acceptance prioritised over journalistic accuracy and scientific advocacy.
  - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
    I think its better characterized as making the meta-level point without specifics as various people's disagreements on the object level would drown out the meta-level point. FWIW, I think he made the right decision.
damnencryption 6y ago
> Humans tend to trust the first thing they hear and we tend to be less skeptical about news media especially if they seem very confident or persuasive. This has been widely studied and seems to be surprisingly effective. When there is lack of expertise or objective metrics, people default to social proof or whatever misleading thing they could use as a measure. Many sales people abuse this and it is written in those manuals as well.
deepnotderp 6y ago
Gell Mann amnesia
esja 6y ago
Your first paragraph describes the Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect: https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/65213-briefly-stated-the-gell-mann-amnesia-effect-is-as-follows-you https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/65213-briefly-stated-the-ge...
paulz_ 6y ago
Michael Crichton of Jurassic Park fame wrote about this experience calling it "Gell-Mann Amnesia." >“Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is 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 as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.” – Michael Crichton I've noticed I have this sort of meta Gell-Mann effect where every time I think of that annecdote the news seems much more dubious. Then a short while later I go back to not thinking about it and reading the news as I otherwise would.
- jasonv 6y ago
  Reading HN though, every assertion from someone who knows something can become a thread of dispute, disagreements and "yeah, but" digressions. So, maybe, who knows anything..
  - onecommentman 6y ago
    “Who knows anything” sounds dangerously close to nihilism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism The problem is nihilists never produce anything of lasting value. Or of any value. It seems to be the posture of those who feel like failures, and justify that perceived failure to themselves by telling themselves that nothing is worth anything. Perhaps others hold that position too. It seems like a dead end in a lot of ways...
    - klmadfejno 6y ago
      A lot of Nihlism is about recognizing that even if everything is without intrinsic meaning and arbitrary subjectivity, that you can assert yourself to a meaningful life in spite of it all. I find that a compelling argument personally.
beefield 6y ago
Generally, I have tip my hat to The Economist Here. Even on the things I think I know something about, they seem to get their facts straight.
- m-ee 6y ago
  That’s funny because the first time I saw someone make the OPs comment it was in reference to the Economist. I want to say there was even a catchy term for it but I’m struggling to find it Edit- It was Gell Mann amnesia as described in a comment further down
- carabiner 6y ago
  I've caught errors about my field (engineering, not software) in other publications, even Popular Science, but the handful of Economist articles on the subject have been spot-on correct on details/nuances. I remember an old hiring ad of theirs. They were looking for "science writers," and they emphasized "scientists who can write, not the other way around."
- loufe 6y ago
  I have to agree. I've been a weekly reader for over 5 years now and I always find their analyses of my own country (Canada) more eloquent and poignant than our own media. I do recommend carefully choosing which articles to take in without a grain or tablespoon of salt. They have excellent practices but they still have an agenda and a world-view through which they frame things. Sometimes I think I'm being smart and reading between the lines but as the thread's target article aptly points out: I'm so swamped with information I never really go down the rabbit hole of proving/disproving my thoughts on articles. I see the paper as a friend who I find annoying in a few ways but that I nevertheless appreciate and generally trust.
- SAI_Peregrinus 6y ago
  Likewise for Ars Technica. They're a specialized source covering technical topics, and they're almost always quite good at it.
forest_dweller 6y ago
You are describing the Geil-Mann amnesia effect. > He used this term to describe the phenomenon of experts believing news articles on topics outside of their fields of expertise, even after acknowledging that articles written in the same publication that are within the experts' fields of expertise are error-ridden and full of misunderstanding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton#GellMannAmnesiaEffect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton#GellMannAmnes...
jancsika 6y ago
What you are experiencing is called the Gell-Mann amnesia effect, named for the author who confirmed the phenomenon in a famous neurological study. There's a short story my Michael Crichton about it you can probably find on Google.

colordrops 6y ago

That's been true since journalism began as a profession.

partiallypro 6y ago

I've always felt that instead of J School, journalists should have majors in topics they are covering and a minor in journalism. When I was in college and worked for the school newspaper I tried hammering this to people, but all the journalism/media professors felt it was a bad idea, probably because it is such a threat to their profession.

triceratops 6y ago
> but all the journalism/media professors felt it was a bad idea, probably because it is such a threat to their profession. Why is it a threat to their profession? We'll still need journalists. and they'll still need training. This seems more like a hiring/staffing problem. Media outlets should start hiring more grads with double majors or non-journalism majors who can write.
SkyMarshal 6y ago
That would be ideal, but many people who major in those topics would likely go into careers doing those things, rather than journalism. However, journalism might make an excellent choice for when they retire but still want something socially impactful to do that leverages their long experience.
jfengel 6y ago
I feel the same way about computer science majors. (At least, the vast majority of them who go into programming, rather than pure theoretical computer science.) Aside from a tiny minority who get to write infrastructure, whose customers are other programmers, the vast majority of programmers will be employed in some domain. I'd rather see programmers have any outside experience... even literature or music or one of those other fields we often deride. The people who majored in that field are likely to be our customers, and when we don't know how they work, we won't be able to serve their needs. At the very least, every programmer should have a minor in some other field. (And ideally not everybody going into the same physics or math fields.)

timr 6y ago

"I’ve always found the news from my trusted sources to be reasonable and accurate until it covers something I know about. Then it seems like a complete mess." Same. This year, with the coverage of Covid (an area where I have a certain level of expertise), I've been bombarded with the extremely low quality level of essentially all of the major news providers. They are more than willing to amplify the most speculative voices, credulously, without even basic fact-checking. The ones that depend on advertising are the worst, overall. Writers with no subject-matter expertise will take a scary quote from a single source, won't bother to make even the simplest of efforts to verify the claim, and will publish it just to get the scoop. I won't mention names because I'll only be downvoted, but there are some extremely high-profile "scientific" media figures who are constantly broadcasting utter nonsense. And because they heard it from a "scientist" on the news, people will attack you if you rebut it. I am old enough to remember when journalists were skeptical of the people they interviewed, and the rule was that no fact was published without independent verification (read "All the President's Men" for example). 2020 is the year where the news media fell apart for me -- it is all simply entertainment now, which is unfortunate.

glennpratt 6y ago
> I won't mention names because I'll only be downvoted Unfortunately, I don't know you or trust you, so this post seems like more noise.
wombatmobile 6y ago
> I won't mention names because I'll only be downvoted Interesting choice you're making there - social acceptance prioritised over journalistic accuracy and scientific advocacy.
- chordalkeyboard 6y ago
  I think its better characterized as making the meta-level point without specifics as various people's disagreements on the object level would drown out the meta-level point. FWIW, I think he made the right decision.

damnencryption 6y ago

> Humans tend to trust the first thing they hear and we tend to be less skeptical about news media especially if they seem very confident or persuasive. This has been widely studied and seems to be surprisingly effective. When there is lack of expertise or objective metrics, people default to social proof or whatever misleading thing they could use as a measure. Many sales people abuse this and it is written in those manuals as well.

deepnotderp 6y ago

Gell Mann amnesia

esja 6y ago

Your first paragraph describes the Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect: https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/65213-briefly-stated-the-gell-mann-amnesia-effect-is-as-follows-you https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/65213-briefly-stated-the-ge...

paulz_ 6y ago

Michael Crichton of Jurassic Park fame wrote about this experience calling it "Gell-Mann Amnesia." >“Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is 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 as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.” – Michael Crichton I've noticed I have this sort of meta Gell-Mann effect where every time I think of that annecdote the news seems much more dubious. Then a short while later I go back to not thinking about it and reading the news as I otherwise would.

jasonv 6y ago
Reading HN though, every assertion from someone who knows something can become a thread of dispute, disagreements and "yeah, but" digressions. So, maybe, who knows anything..
- onecommentman 6y ago
  “Who knows anything” sounds dangerously close to nihilism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism The problem is nihilists never produce anything of lasting value. Or of any value. It seems to be the posture of those who feel like failures, and justify that perceived failure to themselves by telling themselves that nothing is worth anything. Perhaps others hold that position too. It seems like a dead end in a lot of ways...
  - klmadfejno 6y ago
    A lot of Nihlism is about recognizing that even if everything is without intrinsic meaning and arbitrary subjectivity, that you can assert yourself to a meaningful life in spite of it all. I find that a compelling argument personally.

beefield 6y ago

Generally, I have tip my hat to The Economist Here. Even on the things I think I know something about, they seem to get their facts straight.

m-ee 6y ago
That’s funny because the first time I saw someone make the OPs comment it was in reference to the Economist. I want to say there was even a catchy term for it but I’m struggling to find it Edit- It was Gell Mann amnesia as described in a comment further down
carabiner 6y ago
I've caught errors about my field (engineering, not software) in other publications, even Popular Science, but the handful of Economist articles on the subject have been spot-on correct on details/nuances. I remember an old hiring ad of theirs. They were looking for "science writers," and they emphasized "scientists who can write, not the other way around."
loufe 6y ago
I have to agree. I've been a weekly reader for over 5 years now and I always find their analyses of my own country (Canada) more eloquent and poignant than our own media. I do recommend carefully choosing which articles to take in without a grain or tablespoon of salt. They have excellent practices but they still have an agenda and a world-view through which they frame things. Sometimes I think I'm being smart and reading between the lines but as the thread's target article aptly points out: I'm so swamped with information I never really go down the rabbit hole of proving/disproving my thoughts on articles. I see the paper as a friend who I find annoying in a few ways but that I nevertheless appreciate and generally trust.
SAI_Peregrinus 6y ago
Likewise for Ars Technica. They're a specialized source covering technical topics, and they're almost always quite good at it.

forest_dweller 6y ago

You are describing the Geil-Mann amnesia effect. > He used this term to describe the phenomenon of experts believing news articles on topics outside of their fields of expertise, even after acknowledging that articles written in the same publication that are within the experts' fields of expertise are error-ridden and full of misunderstanding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton#GellMannAmnesiaEffect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton#GellMannAmnes...

jancsika 6y ago

What you are experiencing is called the Gell-Mann amnesia effect, named for the author who confirmed the phenomenon in a famous neurological study. There's a short story my Michael Crichton about it you can probably find on Google.