: I dunno. The articles were very widely read—we have the data on that—but actively resisted because they didn't fit people's priors.
Yes, NYT was worse—especially if you consider it topped every story. But must try to make readers understand, no?
-
-
Odds or probabilities may be best indicators we have, but have real limitations in conveying volatility & error.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
NYT perhaps a double whammy: seems highly likely it also primed their editorial/coverage decisions too
-
"foregone conclusion" effect especially persistent once it infects the newsrooms
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.