>and the root comment seems to carry a connotation that the conclusion is not trustworthy on the basis it came from a public forum and not an authoritative sour

>and the root comment seems to carry a connotation that the conclusion is not trustworthy on the basis it came from a public forum and not an authoritative source Right - because reddit is not inherently trustworthy (even though there are subject-matter experts that post there) > when really it's just one degree removed. Hence, 'lazy journalism' (or the sarcastic 'quality journalism') moniker. They were just one degree removed from an authoritative source, and they didn't bother linking to either the reddit post, or the authoritative source (though hard to tell because of paywall)