This is a prime example of how the news misleads the public.
Yes, it is. I’m glad to see this posted. The easiest way to tell if someone has read the article is to… actually read the article and see if it says what they think the headline implies.
The problem, of course, is getting people to read past the headline whenever they believe it is a small piece of a large aggregate that supports their position.
Because when they believe that, defeating a single piece of evidence this way doesn’t do much. Then all you’ve done is knock out one small piece of evidence from what they believe is a large pile.
Hopefully, the goal is to change the research behavior so that they can read sources and debunk stuff themselves, even when the stuff agrees with them, so they can evaluate the whole pile leave themselves only with the strongest sources worth addressing. But there are a lot of people reading a lot of garbage, and that’s kind of a never ending battle.
Yes, it is. I’m glad to see this posted. The easiest way to tell if someone has read the article is to… actually read the article and see if it says what they think the headline implies.
The problem, of course, is getting people to read past the headline whenever they believe it is a small piece of a large aggregate that supports their position.
Because when they believe that, defeating a single piece of evidence this way doesn’t do much. Then all you’ve done is knock out one small piece of evidence from what they believe is a large pile.
Hopefully, the goal is to change the research behavior so that they can read sources and debunk stuff themselves, even when the stuff agrees with them, so they can evaluate the whole pile leave themselves only with the strongest sources worth addressing. But there are a lot of people reading a lot of garbage, and that’s kind of a never ending battle.