Sarah Kavassalis (the original poster) nails it right there: ” the subject shouldn’t get final say” — Period.
Reshared post from +Sarah Kavassalis
Here’s the story everyone is talking about today: “Scientists should be allowed to check stories on their work before publication”
As one might guess, this isn’t being met with the most favorable of impressions. While science journalism is often plagued with problems, I couldn’t possibly imagine this being the best solution. Ask the authors questions while writing your piece on a paper, especially if things are confusing to you, and then fact check with other sources. Contact other experts as well as the subject of your work, but the subject shouldn’t get final say, as a lot of scientists are… well, not great scientists and thus could be telling you nonsense.
Embedded Link
Scientists should be allowed to check stories on their work before publication
News stories about science are different from those about politics or business, because the role of critical review has already been performed
Google+: View post on Google+
How can this be a bad thing? Scientific research doesn’t have an agenda — it says “within this specific set of parameters, I did this, this was the outcome”. Maybe this would clear up so many misconceptions caused by sensationalist journalism?
Carolyn Porco, the project leader of the Cassini Space Mission and star wunderkind has already discussed this issue big time on Twitter, in reference to the same article.