Comment by bnegreve
2 days ago
Not every correlation deserves to be published in the press. If you think about it, it is weird that they even make articles out of statements that only "may" be true.
2 days ago
Not every correlation deserves to be published in the press. If you think about it, it is weird that they even make articles out of statements that only "may" be true.
It is a matter of thresholds, of consequential bets over provisional non-trivial assessments, and of journalistic duty (taking note - the idea is not from the analyst but from sources; journalists take note that sources made statements).
Analysts work speculatively. And the results of the speculation are not trivial when supported by strong elements.
> If you think about it, it is weird that they even make articles out of statements that only "may" be true.
I thought about it. And it's very stupid to imagine uncertainty should be off limits. I hope that isn't what you meant.
I'm saying the incentive to publish articles that make strong claims with little evidence may be problematic.
"May is right in the headline" and "strong claim" don't go together.
I prefer error bars be worn on the sleeve, so I find "may" on display to be refreshing, not dismaying. YMMV
What's your alternate explanation to explain the absence of fentanyl in Italy, and how can my country get so weirdly randomly lucky?
1 reply →