> The problem is that "winning the game" is about publications, tenure, and (less important but increasingly also) popular recognition, rather than about the si

> The problem is that "winning the game" is about publications, tenure, and (less important but increasingly also) popular recognition, rather than about the size of your contribution to valid research results (one hopes that publications and tenure correlate, and yet...). > So, getting results of dubious validity published, and covered in popular press, can be exactly "figuring out the game well enough", an end in itself, rather than a minor step toward a research program. You're describing Science by Press Conference/Press Release. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_by_press_conference https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_by_press_conference