4 ms·
This work was done by a team of people. This is commonly misattributed to a single person.
by TedShiller 4y ago
This work was done by a team of people. This is commonly misattributed to a single person.
- HL33tibCe7 4y ago
- dev_tty01 4y agoYou don't seem to understand the history of the time. There are two names on the report. There was very little, if any, political support at that time for giving her "extra" credit. The more likely scenario is that she should have been first author. That sort of thing happened a lot.
- causi 4y agoI believe they meant misattributed in modern media, not while she was working.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- HL33tibCe7 4y agoYou’re right, I was thinking of a different case. Should have read the article before commenting
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- yucky 4y ago
- jonnybgood 4y agoWhat are you referencing? The paper in the video has two authors. Johnson's name wasn't going to be on it. Initially, it was going to be misattributed to one person who was not Johnson.
- interblag 4y agoOut of curiousity, have you looked at the paper or read the Forbes article linked in one of the other top-level comments? (https://www.forbes.com/sites/kionasmith/2018/08/30/katherine-johnson-fought-to-get-credit-for-her-work/?sh=d4708a4597e4 https://www.forbes.com/sites/kionasmith/2018/08/30/katherine...) The paper itself has only two listed authors - that's also visible in the linked YouTube video and in the paper itself here: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19980227091 https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19980227091 Further, the Forbes article has a quote from the paper's other author: > [the other author] told [their boss], 'Katherine should finish the report, she's done most of the work anyway.' With that in mind, I don't think it's a stretch to refer to this as her calculations, even though I'm sure Ted Skopinski (the other author) made significant contributions as well.