Slashdot Mirror
Why Is So Much Reported Science Wrong (berkeley.edu)
An anonymous reader writes: An article from Berkeley's California Magazine explains some of the reasons science reporting is often at odds with actual science. Quoting: "Where journalism favors neat story arcs, science progresses jerkily, with false starts and misdirections in a long, uneven path to the truth—or at least to scientific consensus. The types of stories that reporters choose to pursue can also be a problem, says Peter Aldhous, [lecturer and reporter]. 'As journalists, we tend to gravitate to the counterintuitive, the surprising, the man-bites-dog story,' he explains. 'In science, that can lead us into highlighting stuff that's less likely to be correct.' If a finding is surprising or anomalous, in other words, there's a good chance that it's wrong.
On the flip side, when good findings do get published, they're often not as earth shattering as a writer might hope. ... So journalists and their editors might spice up a study's findings a bit, stick the caveats at the end, and write an eye-catching, snappy headline—not necessarily with the intent to mislead, but making it that much more likely for readers to misinterpret the results." The article also makes suggestions for both journalists and the scientific community to keep science reporting interesting while being more accurate.
On the flip side, when good findings do get published, they're often not as earth shattering as a writer might hope. ... So journalists and their editors might spice up a study's findings a bit, stick the caveats at the end, and write an eye-catching, snappy headline—not necessarily with the intent to mislead, but making it that much more likely for readers to misinterpret the results." The article also makes suggestions for both journalists and the scientific community to keep science reporting interesting while being more accurate.
You are blaming the entire problem on half of those actually responsible. Many scientists today refuse to let facts get in the way of their theories. This stems from many factors. Pressure to produce results, ego, fear of failure. But there is overwhelming evidence the scientific model has been superseded by the trending now model.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
"We got to #1 in this world because of science,"
Hardly, you were never number 1 in anything, besides having the world record of imprisoned citizens.
Your rockets got build by Nazis, your Nobel Prize winners were born in Germany, China or India, your cars suck, your school system is completely idiotic, the universities are just money machines for the 1%ers, ...I could go on for hours.
Did it ever occur to you why American rockets were built by Nazis? It's because of the scientific and industrial might of the USA that defeated those Nazis during WWII. And why are German and Japanese cars so good? Might have something to do with the billions that America spent on those countries after their well-deserved butt-kicking. I doubt there is anyone who wouldn't prefer to be an average citizen in a Germany or Japan defeated by the US, than an average citizen in a Russia, the UK, or China defeated by the Germans or Japanese?
But go ahead an complain. Complaining about America is one of the first freedoms guaranteed in America, and how we keep getting better. Someone points out a problem and we fix it (although, to paraphrase Churchill, not until after we've tried everything else).