4 ms·

This beautiful (parent) comment, in contrast to the main article, actually contains links and references to the items it refers to. Is there some compelling re

This beautiful (parent) comment, in contrast to the main article, actually contains links and references to the items it refers to. Is there some compelling reason I don't understand why _so_ many magazines / websites, even high profile reputable ones, cannot manage to link or cite?

cousin_it 13y ago
I suspect the reason is that outbound links drive traffic away from ads and internal links. The more visitors you have, the more profit you lose by adding outbound links... It's sad and I wish there was some way to fix the incentives.
- sdoering 13y ago
  That's exactly what people in charge fear in my industry (working in online publishing). The do fear, that the people find the linked ressources better, so that they may never even return. Kind of like the fear of becoming obsolete. But instead of testing and maybe even becoming better, they just forbid us to link out.
kybernetikos 13y ago
I find this particularly galling since many of these publications have fact checkers who have gone to the effort of identifying claims in the original article, tracking down the evidence to prove/disprove it and checking that the article doesn't materially misrepresent the evidence. This is the internet, it shouldn't cost any more to let me see the fact checkers report, and it will save me a massive amount of time reproducing their work. Expandable margin notes on a per paragraph basis would be perfect.
unhammer 13y ago
Science Exchange: https://www.scienceexchange.com/reproducibility https://www.scienceexchange.com/reproducibility Ioannidis' article on false pos/neg and stat.power: http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal... Bohannon's "Who's afraid of a little peer review": http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full (fake submissions) Also related I think is this: http://neurotheory.columbia.edu/~ken/cargo_cult.html http://neurotheory.columbia.edu/~ken/cargo_cult.html ;-)

cousin_it 13y ago

I suspect the reason is that outbound links drive traffic away from ads and internal links. The more visitors you have, the more profit you lose by adding outbound links... It's sad and I wish there was some way to fix the incentives.

sdoering 13y ago
That's exactly what people in charge fear in my industry (working in online publishing). The do fear, that the people find the linked ressources better, so that they may never even return. Kind of like the fear of becoming obsolete. But instead of testing and maybe even becoming better, they just forbid us to link out.

kybernetikos 13y ago

I find this particularly galling since many of these publications have fact checkers who have gone to the effort of identifying claims in the original article, tracking down the evidence to prove/disprove it and checking that the article doesn't materially misrepresent the evidence. This is the internet, it shouldn't cost any more to let me see the fact checkers report, and it will save me a massive amount of time reproducing their work. Expandable margin notes on a per paragraph basis would be perfect.

unhammer 13y ago

Science Exchange: https://www.scienceexchange.com/reproducibility https://www.scienceexchange.com/reproducibility Ioannidis' article on false pos/neg and stat.power: http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal... Bohannon's "Who's afraid of a little peer review": http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full (fake submissions) Also related I think is this: http://neurotheory.columbia.edu/~ken/cargo_cult.html http://neurotheory.columbia.edu/~ken/cargo_cult.html ;-)