Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

+ - Why don’t journalists link to primary source-> 1

Submitted by jcombel
jcombel (1557059) writes "Too often lately I look at the Slashdot blurb, then read then article, then groan. The article submitted was a copy/pasta of another article, which was itself a copy/pasta of a press release. It often takes two or three clicks to get to the original information, or maybe even a web search on the topic because none of the articles actually linked the study. With enough digging, you find why the source was omitted: it is inconvenient for one reason or another, maybe a policy agenda, or maybe just the truth didn't make as sensational a headline.

Ben Goldacre (if there was a thing called a slashdot favorite, he'd be it) writes about how this is getting out of hand, and proposes a mindset for discerning facts on the internet: "I've detected myself using a new rule of thumb: if you don't link to primary sources, I just don't trust you.""

Link to Original Source
This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Why don’t journalists link to primary source

Comments Filter:

After any salary raise, you will have less money at the end of the month than you did before.

Working...