←back to thread

Scientific American's departing editor and the politicization of science

(reason.com)
499 points Bostonian | 1 comments | 18 Nov 24 22:04 UTC | HN request time: 0.202s | source
Show context
insane_dreamer ◴[19 Nov 24 01:09 UTC] No.42179137[source]▶
I clicked on the links of the articles linked to by the author as "egregious" examples of Helmuth's editorial bias, and they're both clearly labeled _OPINION_. (Opinion articles are not scientific articles because they are __opinion__.)

May need to choose some better examples if the author wants to support his point.

replies(4): >>42179278 #>>42179479 #>>42183053 #>>42183149 #
crackercrews ◴[19 Nov 24 01:32 UTC] No.42179278[source]▶
Why does a scientific magazine have an Opinion section in the first place? Has it always? I would guess the number of Opinion pieces has gone up dramatically in the last decade.
replies(3): >>42179358 #>>42179367 #>>42183821 #
1. davorak ◴[19 Nov 24 01:49 UTC] No.42179367[source]▶
Probably because opinions are interesting to most people and people who read pop sci magazines want to read opinions that have more of a science/evidence bent then what they can get out of other magazines and/or newspapers.