Thanks to my good friend, Ann Ny, I’m now scanning a news digest entitled “1440.” From what I can tell, it’s a pretty good survey of what’s happening out there in the wider world of media. From headlines to all the major categories–politics, business, sports & entertainment, science, etc., they’ve got a little sample of all the major media food groups. Thus far (one week in), I think they’re relatively balanced–more news reporting, less editorializing than most outlets.
Today’s 1440 digest included the following zinger:
[V]ariations of this article about a dominant mutation of the coronavirus being more contagious should be taken with a grain of salt. The study has not been peer-reviewed, and some scientists say the headline was exaggerated (plus see this Twitter takedown).
This bit of good news (hopefully an exaggerated headline), also has me musing on the interplay between a major news source (LA Times), serious scientists (biologists at Los Alamos National Laboratory, virologist at Cornell, epidemiologist at Harvard et al.), and social media (Twitter, of course!).
Science in the 21st century must contend with the light-speed of information, whereby research may be misunderstood, misrepresented, or otherwise mistakenly broadcast to a naive public for a reporter’s sensational scoop. Caveat lector.