SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
I found an interesting article on fivethirtyeight.com about fake news and how to address it. It's a long article but worth the read. This bit is near the end:
Media outlets keep trying to debunk fake news. This won't work, particularly for readers who have already decided that the traditional press is fake news — and, fair or not, partisan. Research suggests that the more partisan a topic, the more likely people who identify strongly with one side will double down on their argument even if they are presented with facts that counter it.
Maybe, instead, the media should do a better job of distinguishing real news from fake news, to regain readers' trust. Click-based advertising has left us adrift in a sea of inaccurate, sensational headlines, even at legitimate news outlets; this makes it easier for dramatic fake news headlines to survive. Aggregation has us spreading stories with no original research or corroboration, and it makes everyone look bad when outlets fall for fake bait. Over the holidays, a heartwarming story about a Santa Claus who visited a child's deathbed went viral. Three days later, the Knoxville News Sentinel, which originally published the story, retracted it, but not before it had spread to CNN, Fox, USA Today and more.
Maybe the news should stop trying so hard to entertain.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 07 2017, @04:09AM
After these two errors in fields I'm certain I'm more familiar with than a novelist:
And lest anyone imagine things are different in the hard sciences, consider string theory, for nearly twenty years now the dominant physical theory. More than one generation of physicists has labored over string theory. But—if I understand it correctly, and I may not—string theory cannot be tested or proven or disproven. Although some physicists are distressed by the argument that an untestable theory is nevertheless scientific, who is going to object, really? Face it, an untestable theory is ideal! Your career is secure!
Idiot sign #1.
We need to start remembering that everybody who said that Y2K wasn’t a real problem was either shouted down, or kept off the air.
Idiot sign #2.
In order to prevent myself from suffering the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect, I'm going to have to stop reading Mr. Crichton's non-fiction writing/speaking.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 07 2017, @04:19AM
Regarding #1 it appears now there are conferences about whether to change the definition of science to allow string theory:
https://www.quantamagazine.org/20151216-physicists-and-philosophers-debate-the-boundaries-of-science/ [quantamagazine.org]
It appears some want to set up, and dismiss, a straw-man Popper to allow "wild speculation is true because it is beautiful". Read some Lakatos: http://www.lse.ac.uk/philosophy/department-history/science-and-pseudoscience-overview-and-transcript/ [lse.ac.uk]
BTW, a few years ago I was easily able to find a pdf of this. Not so anymore.
Regarding #2, I know nothing about it and have no opinion.