3 ms·

Also Jonah Lehrer, author of pop science books Imagine and How We Decide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonah_Lehrer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonah_Lehrer

renewiltord 3y ago
This guy is featured in the So You've Been Publicly Shamed book, and it definitely seemed like he was pilloried pretty hard. It is interesting, though, which journalists get tarred and feathered and which ones are celebrated. Certainly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Miller https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Miller and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Novak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Novak have massive journalistic ethical errors: the former fabricating news for the US Government and the latter blowing a CIA agent's cover (the Plame Affair). Yet, they are celebrated journalists. It seems that you have to: - not be hypocritical (it is a greater sin to preach and sin; than simply to sin) - be younger (established powerhouses can steamroll these accusations) And to GP: thank you! The number of times Dan Ariely is involved in this data fabrication stuff does make the whole thing seem a bit fishy. At best, he is bad at trusting people, which makes any claims he makes low-coefficient since they could be from data from fabricators.
- wpietri 3y ago
  Is Miller still a celebrated journalist? I had her down mentally as "noted fraud". Looking at Wikipedia, it looks like she's never done real news again, and has spent her time on what I think of as the "wingnut welfare circuit". And the reactions to her memoir suggest that she's never been welcomed back into the profession: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Miller#Memoir https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Miller#Memoir
  - hgsgm 3y ago
    It's interesting thar Miller left NYT in 2008, the year Obama won the Presidency, and NYT shifted from (right wing) Establishment to (left wing Establishment) to stay aligned with the President.
  - eduction 3y ago
    She is neither celebrated nor an outright fraud. She was disgraced because she reported inaccurate claims (on WMDs in Iraq) from government intelligence sources. Specifically she reported them without sufficient skepticism — without checking the sourcing of the claims (I.e. asking questions like “how did the CIA acquire this intelligence”) or giving sufficient credence and attention to counter claims. Although this is considered bad practice, it is not considered fraudulent. She was indeed takling to highly placed government sources and had reason to believe they were credible. My opinion: Although what she did was rightly viewed, eventually, as journalistic malpractice, she was clearly pleasing her editors who routinely moved her stories to the front page. These editors also failed to demand skepticism and wider investigation, and while at least one was pushed out, the institution of the NY Times remained credulous about government claims. I routinely see stories where they uncritically repeat government claims — especially where classified intelligence is involved and especially relating to military operations. Therefore I believe Miller is also something of a scapegoat.
atchoo 3y ago
This is kind of surreal. I have just realised that I have merged the authors Johann Hari and Jonah Lehrer into one person. I had always assumed Johann Hari had made a fortunate recovery from the Imagine/How We decide scandals to write successful books like Lost Connections. I was feeling guilty for besmirching Johann Hari's reputation in my own mind until looking at his wiki page and finding the HE TOO was involved in both plagiarism and fabrication scandals like Jonah Lehrer. Weird. Explains the mental merger I guess.

renewiltord 3y ago

This guy is featured in the So You've Been Publicly Shamed book, and it definitely seemed like he was pilloried pretty hard. It is interesting, though, which journalists get tarred and feathered and which ones are celebrated. Certainly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Miller https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Miller and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Novak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Novak have massive journalistic ethical errors: the former fabricating news for the US Government and the latter blowing a CIA agent's cover (the Plame Affair). Yet, they are celebrated journalists. It seems that you have to: - not be hypocritical (it is a greater sin to preach and sin; than simply to sin) - be younger (established powerhouses can steamroll these accusations) And to GP: thank you! The number of times Dan Ariely is involved in this data fabrication stuff does make the whole thing seem a bit fishy. At best, he is bad at trusting people, which makes any claims he makes low-coefficient since they could be from data from fabricators.

wpietri 3y ago
Is Miller still a celebrated journalist? I had her down mentally as "noted fraud". Looking at Wikipedia, it looks like she's never done real news again, and has spent her time on what I think of as the "wingnut welfare circuit". And the reactions to her memoir suggest that she's never been welcomed back into the profession: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Miller#Memoir https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Miller#Memoir
- hgsgm 3y ago
  It's interesting thar Miller left NYT in 2008, the year Obama won the Presidency, and NYT shifted from (right wing) Establishment to (left wing Establishment) to stay aligned with the President.
- eduction 3y ago
  She is neither celebrated nor an outright fraud. She was disgraced because she reported inaccurate claims (on WMDs in Iraq) from government intelligence sources. Specifically she reported them without sufficient skepticism — without checking the sourcing of the claims (I.e. asking questions like “how did the CIA acquire this intelligence”) or giving sufficient credence and attention to counter claims. Although this is considered bad practice, it is not considered fraudulent. She was indeed takling to highly placed government sources and had reason to believe they were credible. My opinion: Although what she did was rightly viewed, eventually, as journalistic malpractice, she was clearly pleasing her editors who routinely moved her stories to the front page. These editors also failed to demand skepticism and wider investigation, and while at least one was pushed out, the institution of the NY Times remained credulous about government claims. I routinely see stories where they uncritically repeat government claims — especially where classified intelligence is involved and especially relating to military operations. Therefore I believe Miller is also something of a scapegoat.

atchoo 3y ago

This is kind of surreal. I have just realised that I have merged the authors Johann Hari and Jonah Lehrer into one person. I had always assumed Johann Hari had made a fortunate recovery from the Imagine/How We decide scandals to write successful books like Lost Connections. I was feeling guilty for besmirching Johann Hari's reputation in my own mind until looking at his wiki page and finding the HE TOO was involved in both plagiarism and fabrication scandals like Jonah Lehrer. Weird. Explains the mental merger I guess.