3 ms·
Does the author not understand the concept of "opinion piece"? Every "article" he takes issue with is NOT a scientific article, but an opinion piece.
by alistairSH 2y ago
Does the author not understand the concept of "opinion piece"? Every "article" he takes issue with is NOT a scientific article, but an opinion piece.
- philipov 2y agoA lot of people really don't understand the difference between science and opinion, and that's exactly what's gotten us into the trouble we're in today.
- miltonlost 2y ago[flagged]
- xpe 2y agoCan you point to some more detail on this?
- miltonlost 2y ago[flagged]
- figlent 2y agoAnd the reason is because you are lying, and you know you are lying.
- pfdietz 2y agoI remember when libertarians were actually about individual liberty.
- miltonlost 2y ago[flagged]
- aliasxneo 2y agoIt would be nice to add some evidence to justify the character assassination. I browsed the recent articles and it didn’t seem filled with titles targeting trans rights. Perhaps you’re thinking of a specific one?
- miltonlost 2y ago[flagged]
- figlent 2y agoThis is not true at all.
- raffraffraff 2y agoI can't respond to that post because it's flagged, but hard disagree on that too. Jesse Signal is far from transphobic.
- trosi 2y agoIf you include enough opinion pieces on highly controversial subjects and always from the same perspective your readers will start noticing. Just because they are opinions it doesn't mean that people can't deem them ridiculous.
- alistairSH 2y agoSure, but the author gave us two examples over how many issues? He didn't come remotely close to making his point. :shrug:
- Cpoll 2y agoIn a different context, HN tends to have the same feelings about Scientific American, see: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29741171 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29741171 I think there's an argument to be made that Scientific American shouldn't have opinion pieces that readers will misinterpret as scientific fact.
- crackercrews 2y agoEspecially when some other outlet reports "Scientific American says XYZ". Readers will absolutely treat this as if there are scientific underpinnings. They will give it more credence than a regular opinion piece. The vast majority of them will never know it was even an opinion piece in the first place. I would guess that if you asked 100 random people who had heard of Scientific American, many/most would say that SA publishes science and has no Opinion section. Before this dustup, I would have been in that camp.
- stuckinhell 2y agoDo you not understand the opinion pieces are part of the problem too ?
- someuser2345 2y agoScientific American isn't a social media platform; by publishing these opinion pieces, they implicitly support them. Would you be ok if they published an opinion piece bashing evolution and defending creationism?
- crackercrews 2y ago> by publishing these opinion pieces, they implicitly support them This would seem to be true if they tend to run opinion pieces that are all from one "side". If they ran pieces that espouse conflicting viewpoints, it would not imply that they support all of the opinion pieces they publish. From the look of it, they stick to one team. They wouldn't be taking this heat if they had a broader diversity of thought.
- philipov 2y agoDepends on what you consider diversity of thought. "Bashing evolution" is not diversity of thought, it is crackpottery. Diversity of thought exists in opinions about, e.g. what evolutionary mechanisms are most important, how to interpret old evidence, what are the best opportunities for new research... A Creationist will look at that and call it "all one team" because none of them believe the universe is only 5000 years old, but that's nonsense. It's important to keep an open mind, but not so open your brain falls out.
- alistairSH 2y agoI expect them to publish op/ed pieces they believe their subscribers will find interesting. As long as they're clearer labeled as opinion, what's the problem? Op/ed pieces have been part of journalism pretty much forever.
- smt88 2y agoMajor news orgs publish op-eds they disagree with all the time. They label them as opinion. It's actually unfortunate if publications decide only to publish things they agree with because that fails to acknowledge they could be wrong. Evolution and creationism are settled wars (as far as science is concerned) and wouldn't be interesting to readers. It would be interesting to read a serious assessment of, say, the Covid lab leak theory.
- malfist 2y ago[flagged]
- the__alchemist 2y agoI wouldn't call them far right; for example, they consistently posted articles about the culture of US police brutality, cops killing people on a hair trigger long before it became mainstream a few years ago.
- mrmetanoia 2y ago[flagged]
- tim333 2y agoHere's a take on her resignation from the Guardian if you'd like some balance https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/nov/16/scientific-american-editor-steps-down https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/nov/16/scientific-ame...
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- mudil 2y agoOpinion pieces in scientific magazine should be based on the facts, and not just on opinions.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]