I wonder what the media release looked like? Or if the authors were able to interact directly with the journalists to help frame messages?
-
-
Replying to @LizSturgiss @GidMK
Unfortunately many journalists have convinced themselves that checking the facts of their story with the scientists they're quoting is "letting the source control the story" and therefore unethical. Tried to make the case that there are problems with this and got blocked for it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Geolographer @LizSturgiss
I've never seen a journalist say something like that. There's an issue with scientists reviewing the final piece, not being consulted on the facts of their research
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @LizSturgiss
That's what I was referring to, sorry. I conflate these because even well-meaning journalists can still make changes to wording that can result in factual errors in the final piece. Letting the scientists see the final copy would help guard against these.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Geolographer @LizSturgiss
Yes but there's a huge distinction between the two. Think of it this way - if a politician refused to comment unless they had some ability to modify the final piece, what would that mean for journalistic integrity?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @LizSturgiss
But that's not what I'm suggesting. The journalist can still say no.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Geolographer @LizSturgiss
But you see the issue, no? If scientists are editing the final piece, they've gone from professional comment to editorial control, which is a nightmare for the idea of a free press
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @LizSturgiss
If it's a scientific dispute I'd agree. But when it's on what an individual scientific paper does and does not say, I would think that shouldn't be considered a danger to journalistic integrity, rather a safeguard for it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Geolographer @LizSturgiss
What if there are several interpretations and different experts disagree? Happens almost constantly
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @LizSturgiss
I don't know how else to say the journalists could say no to the feedback they get; I'm not arguing for editorial control, just a chance to point out factual errors.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
What's a factual error? Most things are open to interpretation. Any commentary comes with some amount of editorial control
-
-
Replying to @GidMK @LizSturgiss
Can you use the headline you were criticizing as an example? You pointed out that it fabricated claims the source paper didn't make.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.