A case study in crap...or how our media sucks.

[eynon81]

[Professor]

Answering your last question, "Everything!"

I've said it before, and I'm sure I'll say it again. It's OK to get research points from the media. But, don't take it as gospel. If I read a story about something which I think is important, I'll read at least 2-3 more stories on it. If everyone says the same things (in different ways), then I usually assume it's somewhat accurate. But, when the facts get distorted, then I'll know it's fishy.

Here's a quick way. Go to Fox News and read a story. Then go over the MSNBC and read the same story. Compare the two, throwing out everything that doesn't appear in both versions. The stuff that's left will be the facts.

Know the facts, then make up your own damn mind.

[Gus]

Don't ever trust a newspaper or magazine to accurately depict the results of scientific research. They nearly always exaggerate or omit important details. This tends to get worse as your news source gets more and more local.

If the media is quoting a piece of research, you better go read the damn thing yourself, because they're probably misrepresenting or misunderstanding it.

This may not be as bad for political research, but the media is absolutely terrible at interpreting the results of scientific research.

[eynon81]

[jurupa]

[foadi]

you post on CD jurupa?

great site for trolling

[Clarino]

[jurupa]

[foadi]

damn, the political forum on there has over 4 million posts now

http://www.city-data.com/forum/politics ... roversies/

so many partisan hacks. we should recruit from there

[Precocity]