What is actually outrageous is that Scientific American publishes articles like this. It's an institution that, like so many, is destroying itself by getting into politics, especially the politics of outrage.
replies(2):
https://web.archive.org/web/20211007051559/https://www.scien...
Then there’s “Diversity”, another section that has only been on the record as active since 2021:
https://web.archive.org/web/20220623091738/https://www.scien...
Here’s “Inequality”:
https://web.archive.org/web/20210926013845/https://www.scien...
We’re only one letter away from completing our “Forbidden Non-State 3-Letter Agency” bingo card.
Here’s a topic directory from 2014:
https://web.archive.org/web/20140531173853/http://www.scient...
Where would you file this story in 2014?
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/from-civil-rights...
Today it’s under “Behavior”, which for a time was referred to as “Behavior and Society”, a section that appears to often be used as a place to put more overt political pieces, along with the Opinion section:
Scientific American also had a report (what looks like a page that collects articles under a same theme of special interest) on The Black Lives Matter Movement.
Can you point to any article published by them in the last 70 years as absurd as this?
Or this?
I don’t think that the implicit distinction between “getting into politics” (implying the outlet is adopting a noticeable ideological stance) and “addressing political issues” (that can arguably be described as scientific topics with political implications, as opposed to vice versa) warrants the color of your responses.
Maybe you’re just floating in the same tide as them.