Discussion Post #1

  In Jeanne Fahnestock's essay 'Accommodating Science', she discusses how popular science outlets take creative liberties with scientific studies published in academic journals in order to present the findings to a less scientifically literate public audience while simultaneously creating interesting journalistic pieces. Fahnestock highlights several examples of how simply changing the language or hedging uncertainties can lead to hypotheses being presented as fact.
  Interestingly, this essay was published in July of 1986, long before the explosion of the internet, social media outlets, and the rapid dissemination of information.
  The phenomenon described by Fahnestock in 1986 has grown in ways she couldn't have possibly envisioned. With the proliferation of websites like Wired, as well as popular science magazines, television shows like 'Mythbusters', and an endless parade of sci/ tech blogs, science has become part of public consciousness, perhaps more than ever before.
  In today's world, a scientific article can be published, cherry picked for sensational findings, rocketed through social platforms like Reddit, Twitter, and Facebook, and then discussed on Good Morning America as fact before  any chance of repudiation.
  As we discussed in class, it is clear that reporting on scientific discoveries need to be more carefully done, with less rampant sensationalization. But how does society combat the social media aspect?
How can 'citizen journalists' be held responsible for generating sensational headlines that multiply and spread across social media platforms, and are then taken as fact by a lay audience?