3 ms·
We continue to disseminate this type of news by linking to university press releases or technology news sites rather than the paper directly. 90% of the time p
by DoingIsLearning 6y ago
We continue to disseminate this type of news by linking to university press releases or technology news sites rather than the paper directly.
90% of the time press releases oversimplify results and overstate the research impact when the actual paper strives to be on point and accurate.
I appreciate it's hard to stay true to the original research and explain things in a simple but engaging way. On the other hand it sometimes feel like creative freedom in second hand reporting does more harm than good.
- anigbrowl 6y agoStrongly agree, but my experience is that linking to papers directly usually means your thread will die with only a few comments; most people don't want to put in the effort to read the paper and many either don't read or quibble with the abstract. Also, a lot of business websites and Github pages are fluffy and PR and boring academic papers don't stand out well by comparison. Sadly commercial logic means that most third party science news reporting reverts to a sensational mean because there isn't that much money in accessible-but-serious journalism. Scientific American used to occupy a sweet spot of being informative yet accessible, but as the market at that spot shrank they watered down the quality of their coverage, and that was over 20 years ago. Quanta seems like the best online science writing in recent years but at the cost of fairly limited scope.