343
How Science Reporting Works (infosec.pub)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/funny@sh.itjust.works
6 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 29 points 1 year ago (5 children)

It's missing the next frame where no one believes the scientist anymore no matter what he/she says.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [+] -17 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    maybe if they stopped promising 5 year cures based on some stupid rodent data people would take them more seriously.

    Media does not want to write about incremental discoveries. So all we get is cancer and Alzheimers cures and amazing new batteries every week.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The media does not want to write about incremental discoveries so instead they make up sensationalist headlines and then clarify in the body of the work. Knowing full well that a lot of people won't read beyond the headline.

    Fancy been so stupid that you can't work that out.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    For profit journalism is a curse to the society. All news source globally should be non-profit with ad revenues enough to ensure comfortable wages to reporters. There should be a capped revenue beyond which And any excess ad revenues should be put in a trust that helps to save niche journalism that might not be ad lucrative.

    Of course inflation and national wage should be adjusting said cap every year.

    And that dream will probably never come True in my lifetime, but hey a man can dream.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent