• Gaywallet (they/it)
    link
    fedilink
    62 years ago

    I’ve seen plenty of science reporters directly contradict what’s spelled out in the study they are reporting on. Sadly the highlighted quote at the top wouldn’t be enough to ensure accurate reporting or interpretation of science. This is why we ‘solve cancer’ multiple times every year. It would be awfully nice, however, if there were more institutions devoted to precise and accurate reporting on science, as my default behavior nowadays is to more or less ignore the reporting and go straight to the source. In many cases the abstract of the paper is enough to understand the real findings, but more information is available if I feel the desire to dig further.

    • @incici
      link
      42 years ago

      I’ve seen this so many times. It’s usually the fault of the journalist who either does not understand the subject, or has a narrative to spin.