Comment by vintagedave
20 hours ago
In fairness, it's a workaround against something that likely should not have happened. Problems require creative (aka unusual) solutions.
20 hours ago
In fairness, it's a workaround against something that likely should not have happened. Problems require creative (aka unusual) solutions.
Rejections from journals are not uncommon and sometimes it's for somewhat questionable reasons.
Uploading the manuscript to a preprint server and/or submitting to another journal, which Adamala is doing/planning to do, is the normal response.
Sending it to journalists beforehand is what I consider an overreaction.
It would only be effective if the significance of this work is clear. They certainly felt this message needed to reach people, and that it did work makes it self evident they were probably right.
Journalists believing what you tell them says nothing about if the underlying work is actually significant.
The legacy of bad science being picked up is why this is a bad idea, even you personally don’t think it’s an issue the risk reward isn’t about just you.
11 replies →
Why would it be an overreaction?
[dead]
> Sending it to journalists beforehand is what I consider an overreaction.
No knowledge on this particular situation. My guess is that they wanted to protect their work by getting it out there. This prevents someone from stealing it during the peer review process.
Journalists are meant to report on the news. This sounds like an interesting piece of science/news to me.
If you have something so truly revolutionary that everyone can see with their own two eyes how awesome it is you don't have to rely on a middleman to bless it. "Ok your loss"
Nobody knows how another person will see something with their eyes.
What appears to be obvious and revolutionary to one person may not be so to all.
Review is precisely to protect against the importance and accuracy of a work being decided by the person who is most invested in it being so.
4 replies →
"everyone" is overly constrained.
"The intended audience" is what is needed, and absolutely does require a middleman to publish it.
No blessing required.
1 reply →