Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Submission + - Why don’t journalists link to primary source (guardian.co.uk) 1

jcombel 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."

This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived.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:

Those who can, do; those who can't, write. Those who can't write work for the Bell Labs Record.

Working...