3 ms·
Starting with an actual study is a gigantic improvement compared to the "we quote a random person's conspiracy theory as fact" style of journalism.
by wredcoll 1y ago
Starting with an actual study is a gigantic improvement compared to the "we quote a random person's conspiracy theory as fact" style of journalism.
- AnimalMuppet 1y agoIs a dodgy study that "establishes" a preconceived idea really all that much better than a random person's conspiracy theory?
- wredcoll 1y agoLiterally yes, we can read the study's hypothesis, its experiments, the data it collects and then actually evaluate it on the merits. Conspiracy theories are unfalsifiable.
- AnimalMuppet 1y agoFair enough. They're better in that way. But they are no better at actually supplying us with knowledge or evidence, though they claim to. So in that way, they might be worse.
- hitekker 1y agoIMO, a bad study requires a lot more effort and expertise to dismiss than a conspiracy theory. Most people, not even paid experts, don't have that time. They're more liable to accept a bad but fashionable study than an easily debunked fantasy like Pizzagate. Hidden poison is worse than obvious manure.