4 ms·
In the general case, I agree. In this case, science research/publication, there should be no trust necessary. The issue here isn't that your average Joe reading
by xboxnolifes 4y ago
In the general case, I agree. In this case, science research/publication, there should be no trust necessary. The issue here isn't that your average Joe reading an article was fooled. The issue is that the news journalists reporting on this were fooled into writing about bad science. These are the people/organizations whose job it is to curate what to report, and who's trust is lost.
- sriram_malhar 4y agoI agree that journalists _should_ do due diligence. But society is full of lazy and evil people, who will not do it, or worse, manufacture a false trail of though unsupported by evidence. But "scientists" like this who think of themselves as doing the public a service shouldn't have to pile on more shit on the world. If they want to do good, they should do exposés on lazy journalism. In both cases they should pay for their misdeeds, at the very least by being shamed in public, or losing govt funding for some time, etc depending on the scale.