RefBan

Referral Banners

Wednesday, February 20, 2013

Top Stories from the last 24 hours

The Next Web - Top Stories Today

More top stories on The Next Web »

Are you a startup CEO? Then you don't want to miss this class: How to be an effective startup CEO?

That's all for now.

Best,
TNW Team
Unsubscribe | Update subscription preferences
Copyright © 2013 The Next Web

Slatest PM: Obamacare's Surprise Florida Victory

Trouble viewing this email? View these recent stories in your browser.
 
header
Wednesday, February 20, 2013

Your daily PM briefing from The Slatest (@slatest), your daily news companion.

By Josh Voorhees (@JoshVoorhees)

Florida's Medicaid Surprise: Associated Press: "Florida Gov. Rick Scott has announced that he will expand Medicaid to an estimated 900,000 additional Florida residents under President Barack Obama's health care overhaul. The decision is a surprise since Scott has been a vocal critic of the Affordable Care Act. The Republican governor said Wednesday that he will support a bill that would expire in three years. Scott entered politics in 2009 running national cable TV commercials criticizing the president's plan. The federal government will pay for the Medicaid expansion for the first three years and pay 90 percent after that."

A Change of Heart: Washington Post: "Ever since the president’s reelection, which secured the Affordable Care Act’s political future, Scott’s stance has changed. He had a number of meetings with Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius on the provision and announced a new openness to the implementing the law."

Not a Done Deal Just Yet: Tampa Bay Times: "Scott's endorsement means that as many as 1 million Floridians could gain access to health care, if the Republican-controlled Legislature agrees. That is not a certainty. ... Scott said Tuesday he would support a three-year expansion of Medicaid. After that, the Legislature would have to vote to reauthorize the program to keep it going. ... His endorsement of the Medicaid expansion came hours after the federal government agreed to grant Florida a conditional waiver to privatize Medicaid statewide for the state's roughly 3 million current recipients. The two announcements appear linked."

Happy Wednesday and welcome to the Slatest PM. Follow your afternoon host on Twitter at @JoshVoorhees and the whole team at @slatest.

Mitt's Return to the Stage: CBS News: "After remaining almost completely out of the public eye since losing the 2012 election to President Obama, former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney is stepping back into the spotlight with a speech next month to conservative activists. Romney will address attendees of the annual Conservative Political Action Conference when they meet in Washington March 14-16."

Extra! Extra!: Bloomberg: "New York Times Co. is formally exploring a sale of the Boston Globe, its only remaining business outside the core New York Times media brand. The publisher is working with Evercore Partners Inc. as an adviser for a sale, Times Co. said today in a statement. The company intends to focus its strategy and investment on the Times brand, it said. Times Co., controlled by the Ochs-Sulzberger family, is coping with a difficult advertising market as spending on national campaigns continues to shrink industrywide. The publisher has sold other assets unrelated to the Times brand, getting rid of regional newspapers and About.com within the past 13 months."

Nagin Pleads Not Guilty: CBS News: "Former New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin has pleaded not guilty to charges he accepted bribes, free trips and other gratuities in exchange for helping contractors secure millions of dollars in work for the city. ... A 21-count indictment last month accuses Nagin of accepting more than $200,000 in bribes, free loads of granite for a family business and trips to Hawaii, Jamaica and other places. The charges against Nagin are the product of a City Hall corruption investigation that already has resulted in guilty pleas by two former city officials and two businessmen and a prison sentence for a former city vendor."

Jesse Jackson Jr. Is Going to Jail: Chicago Tribune: "Former U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. and his wife, former Chicago Ald. Sandi Jackson, pleaded guilty today in what prosecutors said was a conspiracy to siphon about $750,000 in federal campaign funds for their personal use. Jackson Jr. entered a negotiated plea of guilty this morning on one felony count of conspiracy to commit false statements, wire fraud and mail fraud. He could face years in prison when he is sentenced this summer."

Your Sequester Update: Reuters: "Defense Secretary Leon Panetta formally notified Congress on Wednesday that the Pentagon plans to put civilian defense employees on unpaid leave this year if $46 billion in across-the-board U.S. government spending cuts take effect on March 1. The announcement of congressional notification begins a 45-day process that could ultimately lead to unpaid leave for most of the department's 800,000 civilian employees around the globe."

Wi-Fi Gridlock: New York Times: "The Federal Communications Commission on Wednesday took a step to relieve growing congestion on Wi-Fi networks in hotels, airports and homes, where Americans increasingly use multiple data-hungry tablets, smartphones and other devices for wireless communications. The commission proposed making a large chunk of high-frequency airwaves, or spectrum, available for use by unlicensed devices, including Wi-Fi routers like those that many Americans use in their homes. The agency’s five commissioners also expressed hopes that the new airwaves would unleash new innovations, just as unlicensed spectrum in the past has made possible such devices as cordless phones, garage door openers and television remote controls."

A Few More Quick Hits From Slate

See you back here tomorrow. Until then, tell your friends to subscribe, or simply forward the newsletter on and let them make up their own minds.

BEST FEATURED STORIES
header
Ex-Senator Admits To Fathering Child With GOP Colleague's Daughter
header
How Mac Users Can Rid Themselves of the World's Worst Plug-In, Java
header
Watch Emily Bazelon Make Stephen Colbert Cry on Last Night's Colbert Report
header
Fox News Host Doesn't Think Campus Rape Is a Real Problem
 
Copyright 2013 The Slate Group | Privacy Policy
The Slate Group | c/o E-mail Customer Care | 1350 Connecticut Avenue NW Suite 410 | Washington, D.C. 20036

Unsubscribe | Forward to a Friend
 

The Mystery of Israel's 'Prisoner X'

February 20th, 2013Top Story

The Mystery of Israel's 'Prisoner X'

By Adrian Chen

The Mystery of Israel's 'Prisoner X'A byzantine international spy scandal has been unravelling over the past two weeks with no end in sight. It involves double-agents, Mossad assassinations, nuclear sabotage, and the too-good-to-be-true code name "Prisoner X."

The story, or at least what we know of the story for sure, starts in December 2010, when 34-year-old Australian-Israeli Ben Zygier was found dead in the shower after allegedly hanging himself with a bedsheet in the most secure section of Israel's most secure prison. Zygier had disappeared the prior February and been imprisoned in Ayalon Prison's infamous Unit 15, a solitary confinement unit that was originally built to house Yigal Amir, Yitzhak Rabin's assassin.

Zygier had been held under the utmost secrecy—even his jailers didn't didn't know his identity, referring to him only as "Prisoner X." The first hints of Zygier's case emerged in the summer of 2010, when Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronot posted a tantalizing wisp of a story about Prisoner X.

"He is in absolute isolation from the external world," a prison source told the paper. "I'm not aware of any other prisoner held in such grave conditions of isolation." The post was quickly removed. According to the Israeli affairs blogger Richard Silverstein, the Israeli press had been put under a strict gag order regarding Prisoner X, forbidden even to report the existence of the blackout. The Israeli press is subject to official censorship, where any story on matters of national security must be approved by the military censor's office.

But a few foreign news outlets picked up the story. Silverstein, a harsh critic of Israeli censorship policies, persisted in hunting down the identity of Prisoner X, at one point mis-identifying him as an Iranian general. Then in December of 2010, shocking news emerged that Prisoner X had committed suicide, again published and removed by an israeli newspaper within minutes. Still, the identity of the man remained a mystery.

Finally, last week, the Australian Broadcasting Company named Prisoner X: He was Ben Zygier, a 34-year-old married father of two, and he was a Mossad agent suspected of unspecified serious crimes against Israel.

Yet even after the ABC broke the news, the Israeli government tried to maintain a strict blackout. Israeli news stories about the ABC report were pulled down as soon as they were posted. An emergency meeting of Israel's "editors committee"—an informal organization that works with the government to self-censor Israel's media—was called, and editors were reminded not to report on the story which could "severely embarrasses" the country.

The Mystery of Israel's 'Prisoner X'Further reporting, mostly by Australian sources, has filled in some of the details of Zygier's life. The son of a prominent Jewish community leader in Melbourne, Zygier moved to Israel from Australia about 10 years ago. There he had been recruited by Mossad, which frequently seeks out Jews with foreign passports who can travel more freely. Zygier reportedly underwent multiple name changes to apply for new passports, under which he traveled repeatedly to Iran. He had possibly tried to recruit Middle Eastern students while studying at Australia's Monash University, and had already fallen under surveillance of the country's Security Intelligence Organization (ASIO), which suspected he was an Israeli spy along with two other Australian Jews referred to as "Paul Y." and "David Z." by Der Spiegel.

So Zygier was a spy. But the mystery of what went wrong still remains. What sort of crime could he have been accused of to warrant such extreme secrecy and seclusion? Conspiracy theorists have had fertile soil to till, and the rumor mill has been fed by Israel's dogged attempts to suppress the story: Some speculate that Zygier had acted as a double agent for Australian intelligence services. He was reportedly linked to Mossad's dramatic 2010 Dubai assassination of a Hamas gun runner. In that case, four of the 29 suspected agents used fake Australian passports to travel to the site of the hit, much to the Australian government's chagrin. Perhaps Zygier was revealing to Australian authorities details about the operation even as he helped accomplish it.

The ASIO had "interrogated him (Zygier), they suspected him, they knew many things," a security official told The Australian.

Others speculate he may have been about to reveal that the government of Abu Dhabi was complicit in the assassination. Still others say it had to do with spilling secrets about Israel's sabotage of Iran's nuclear program. And of course there's the nagging question of whether Zygier really managed to kill himself in the most secure prison in Israel, or maybe had some help, indirectly or otherwise.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netenyahu has defended Israel's handling of the case and denied that Zygier may have been turned by the Australians. Curiously, Zygier's family isn't talking. When they were notified of Zygier's imprisonment by Israel in 2010 they did not request help from the Australian government. And when Zygier killed himself that December, they had his body flown back to Australia where they quietly buried it in a Jewish cemetery in the Melbourne suburbs. The real story behind Prisoner X may have been buried with him.

[Image by Jim Cooke]

Number of comments

Sony Will Announce The PlayStation 4 Tonight. Here's Everything We Know So Far.

February 20th, 2013Top Story

Sony Will Announce The PlayStation 4 Tonight. Here's Everything We Know So Far.

By Jason Schreier

Sony Will Announce The PlayStation 4 Tonight. Here's Everything We Know So Far.Assuming Sony hasn't just been screwing with us for the past few weeks, this is it: tonight, we'll get our first look at the next PlayStation.

At 6pm Eastern, Sony will hold a big event in New York City to announce the highly-anticipated PlayStation 4. Kotaku will be in attendance, and we'll be reporting everything that happens as it happens.

But for now, what should expect from the next next-generation? Let's look back at everything we've heard about Sony's next console.

It's codenamed Orbis.

At least internally. Developers and publishers all across the world refer to Sony's new machine by the codename Orbis, a Latin word meaning circle, ring, or orbit. Combine that with Vita—the name of Sony's handheld—and you have Orbis Vita: the circle of life.

Though we don't know what Sony is *officially* calling the next PlayStation, some have theorized that it might not be called the PlayStation 4, as four is an unlucky number in Japan. So maybe they'll stick with Orbis? It does have a nice ring to it.

Some other suggestions: PlayStation U, Pl4yst4tion, Return Of PlayStation, PlayStation 5, PlayStation: The Next Generation, 2 Play 2 Station, Xbox.

It's probably out this holiday season.

Yesterday we heard from a reliable source that the next PlayStation will be out this November. This matches up with what we've been hearing since last year: a holiday 2013 release for the new machine.

Although a few rumors suggested that the PS4 could be pushed back to early 2014, recent rumors—reported by Kotaku, Edge, and The Wall Street Journal, among others—all point to this year.

We probably won't hear every detail tonight.

Sony would be insane to play all of their cards on a random Wednesday in February. Expect them to reserve at least a few major details—final release date, pricing, launch lineup—for E3 this June and possibly another big event this fall.

Maybe history can shed some light on what will be revealed tonight? Check out our full rundown on what Sony announced at past hardware events.

The prototype controllers look like this.

Leaked from various sources, here are photos of the prototype PS4 controller that developers have been playing around with:

Sony Will Announce The PlayStation 4 Tonight. Here's Everything We Know So Far.

Sony Will Announce The PlayStation 4 Tonight. Here's Everything We Know So Far.

Sony Will Announce The PlayStation 4 Tonight. Here's Everything We Know So Far.

We don't know if the final controller will look exactly like the prototype, but it's safe to expect that it will be similar. The middle touchpad—not a touchscreen, but a touchpad—matches up with rumors we've heard and reported. We can't see any "share" button, but...

The console will support sharing in some way.

Orbis documentation seen by Kotaku suggested that the PS4's controller will have a "share" button, and Edge took our reports one step further, saying they've heard that the PS4 will automatically record gameplay so you can share it with all of your Twitter followers or Facebook friends or other denizens of the Internet.

While it's possible Sony has changed their plans, it's likely that Sony's next console will allow you to share videos and screenshots of your games in some fashion. Maybe you'll be able to upload video footage directly to YouTube? Maybe you'll be able to watch 12-year-olds call you racial slurs in real time? Anything's possible with PlayStation™!

The console will feature cloud gaming.

Last year, when Sony bought the cloud gaming company Gaikai, everyone assumed that they would incorporate cloud gaming in some fashion. And sure enough, Sony recently registered domains for something called PlayStation Cloud.

So what does all of that mean? One report says you'll be able to stream PS3 games. Likely you'll be able to store save files and downloadable games on the cloud as well.

Some of the games are already announced.

Gamers aren't the only ones twiddling their thumbs and waiting impatiently for Sony and Microsoft to open up about their new consoles—even the people who make games can't seem to hold back. Ubisoft's Watch Dogs stole the show at E3 2012, and last week we showed you a poster that essentially identifies the open-world cyberpunk game as a next-gen title. Maybe we'll see more footage of that game tonight.

Polish developer CD Projekt Red announced The Witcher 3 for a 2014 release on "all high-end platforms"—subtle, right?—and we expect to see some Battlefield 4 tonight as well.

Then of course there's the curious case of The Phantom Pain, the non-game game that stars a man who looks a lot like Solid Snake, and is developed by an enigmatic studio that may have ties to Metal Gear Solid creator Hideo Kojima. (It's Metal Gear Solid 5.)

Tonight, the puzzles will finally end. Publishers can stop trying to find sneaky ways to announce their next-gen games. The PS4 is coming.

We're very excited to see what Sony reveals tonight, but it's worth keeping in mind that these shows are always packed full of sizzle reels that might not actually reflect reality. Smoke and mirrors. Still, we're about to enter the next next next next next generation. I say bring it on.

Number of comments

How to Conduct Scientific Research On the Internet (Without Getting Duped)

February 20th, 2013Top Story

How to Conduct Scientific Research On the Internet (Without Getting Duped)

By Alan Henry

How to Conduct Scientific Research On the Internet (Without Getting Duped) You know how to tell if something controversial is actually true, but what if you want to read up on something without stumbling into half-truths and pseudoscience? Here's how to use the internet as a powerful research tool without being led astray.

The internet is full of useful, well-documented information, and all of it is right at our fingertips. The problem is that the signal-to-noise ratio can be pretty low. Most search engines try to separate the real science from unsourced opinions and so-called "experts" only interested in selling books, but it's not enough to guarantee validity. With these tips, you'll learn how to quickly cut through the weeds and get to the good stuff in no time.

Recognize Your Two Biggest Research Enemies

How to Conduct Scientific Research On the Internet (Without Getting Duped) Before you just fire up Google and start researching blindly, you have two big obstacles to watch out for:

  • Your own confirmation bias. Confirmation bias is your own natural tendency to find, believe, and source information that agrees with (or confirms) your already-held opinions about a topic. It's a problem even for highly educated scientists and experts in their field, and it's something you'll need to be ready to battle when you're looking into a topic that's new to you. You may be presented with information that'll challenge your preconceived notions and beliefs. That's okay—that really just means you need to keep an open mind and seek to understand and find evidence to all sides of an argument (especially the ones you disagree with.) For more on confirmation bias, read this excellent article on the topic by journalist and author David McRaney. Photo by Yi Chen.
  • Questionable sources of information. The only thing worse than confirmation bias are trapped in unsourced, poorly-cited articles that draw conclusions without backing them up. Even the best do this sometimes, like citing a study that doesn't support their conclusions or reporting a study's conclusions blindly. Keep an eye out though, even poorly-cited work can lead you to valuable reading, but unsourced conjecture should be treated as opinion.

Combined, these two can convince people to believe even the most tenuous claims. We discussed how to beat them back and get to the truth, but n this case, you're starting from scratch and researching a new subject. Just keep them in mind and watch out for anything that seems too good to be true, or doesn't pass the almighty sniff test.

Fire Up Your Critical Thinking Skills and Start Searching

How to Conduct Scientific Research On the Internet (Without Getting Duped) If your goal is to read up on current research in quantum physics or understand a specific type of cancer, the first thing to know is that real research doesn't take ten minutes. If you really want to dig into a topic, you'll have to do a good bit of hunting and reading. Through it all, you'll also have to make sure what you find is corroborated elsewhere (Hey, it's called research for a reason).

Open your favorite search engine, whether it's Google, Bing, or something else, and start looking for the topic you'd like to learn more about. These search engines won't be the end of your search, but they're fine for getting your feet wet. You'll probably find yourself wading through thousands of results from hundreds of sources (and we'll get to how to differentiate the good ones from the bad ones in a moment), but this is a good way to understand the depth of information available for the subject you're researching. It's also a great way to get an overview of what's available so you can refine your searches to get right to what you want to know.

Next, try some of these more scholarly search engines as well. They'll lead you to more credible, cited information, along with journal articles and reference material that can help:

  • Google Scholar cuts out a lot of material and searches directly for articles in well-regarded publications, journal articles, research and reference papers, and other useful material.
  • Scirus restricts its indexing to journal articles, papers, scientists' websites and homepages, courseware, government research institutions, patents, and other legal documents.
  • How to Conduct Scientific Research On the Internet (Without Getting Duped) PLOS, or the Public Library of Science, is a non-profit public advocacy group and publisher with the aim to make as many scientific journal articles and paper open and accessible to the public as possible. PLOS's journal publications (including PLOS One, which you may already know,) offer open public access to some of the latest research in a number of fields.
  • The United States Library of Congress contains more information than you can possibly access through its website, but it's a good jumping off point for additional well-sourced information. Plus, the LoC's Ask a Librarian service is a great way to get in touch with a reference librarian from the comfort of your computer. You can ask them real questions and get well-researched and documented answers, not just for yourself but for the world and anyone else who may searches that question in the future.

Try to avoid second or third party articles that write about studies or research unless they link to or quote the study in question. If they do, go read that instead. Relying on third party articles is like playing the "telephone game"—the actual information from the first party will likely be distorted by the time it gets to you. At best, it's not a problem, but at worst the conclusions of a third-party article or press release can be wildly different from the conclusions in the study itself. Even the most well-intentioned outlets and highly trained journalists suffer from this sometimes.

Learn to Differentiate Good Sources from Questionable Ones

Remember those "questionable sources" we talked about earlier? When you start your search, you'll need to learn to separate them from the good stuff. Scammers and hoaxsters go out of their way to disguise marketing copy as "journal articles" and "clinical testing." Here are a couple of ways to tell whether the reference you're reading is legitimate:

  • How to Conduct Scientific Research On the Internet (Without Getting Duped)Is the paper from a real, actively published scholarly journal? Hit Google (or any of the above-mentioned scientific search engines) and look up the journal name. See when the latest edition was published, and if there's any way to read the latest articles (or even abstracts) from it. Look at the journal's own website (it should have one, even if it's just a page by its sponsoring organization) and see if it's peer reviewed. It's not foolproof, but you would be surprised how often a company will string together sciencey-sounding words to make up a journal name and then claim "results" from testing of its product appeared there. One scientist even made up a journal so she would have a place to publish her own "studies." Verification is your friend.
  • Is the paper from a known lab, institution, university, and/or author(s)? Beyond the journal that accepted and reviewed the paper, search for the name of the organization or research institution that sponsored the paper. If it's a college or university, this will be easy—but if you find a company masquerading as a research institution, be wary. Similarly, look up the names of the lead authors on the paper. They (or the labs in which they work) should be easy to find, and you should be able to verify their credentials. They may even discuss their recent work on their own web sites.
  • Can you find references to the paper and its authors in multiple places? If you Google the name of the paper, you should be able to find it in multiple places, not just a handful of sycophantic blogs. This is particularly a problem with health news: one study parroted on opinionated blogs can become a "Google fact" even if the study is fake. With most legitimate studies, you should be able to find coverage and discussion in a number of places that both support and criticize it.
  • How to Conduct Scientific Research On the Internet (Without Getting Duped) Is the paper itself well-cited? Can you actually find the citations it uses? Before a researcher paper is published, it must be properly cited. All previous work that led to current research, peripheral work being done by other labs, and any basic theories taken for granted in the paper all have to be noted. You can usually find these citations throughout a paper and at the end for further reading. If the paper you're reading is heavy on ramble and light on citations and references, that should be a red flag. Look up those citations and see if they are what the author claims they are (if you can even find them.) With luck, you'll have even more to read and more data to use in your own research.
  • Can you easily see who funded the study the paper is based on? First, having a study funded by a private entity doesn't make it a bad study. It can and should raise an eyebrow to the nature and the conclusions of the research, but if the methodology is sound, there's no reason not to accept its results. However, studies paid for and commissioned by private entities are often used in marketing, so look for independent research on the same topic. Even the lack of independent research can say a lot about the paper you're reading.
  • Can you read the whole paper? This isn't always a deal breaker, but see if you can get your hands on the full text of the paper. We'll get to some creative ways to do so in a moment, but look for journal articles and studies that offer at the very least the abstract, citations, and conclusions. Be wary if you get a webpage with nothing more than a conclusions section, especially if there's no link to the rest of the paper (because it doesn't exist.)

These tips don't just go for journal articles, they go for articles and entire web sites as well. Granted, third party reporting isn't held to the same standard as peer-reviewed journals, but most well-intentioned publications at least try to cite their sources, offer additional reading, and avoid drawing unfounded conclusions from individual studies.

For example, Wikipedia may seem like a good resource, but it's really not. Wikipedia data is too easy to change and the pages often too static and outdated to be useful for reference material. That doesn't make it useless though: Wikipedia is a great place to read up on the basics, and a great jumping-off point for more reading. Wikipedia's real research power is in its own citations—even if an article is out of date or inaccurate, that article's citations are worth reading (and sometimes, citing.)

Learn to Read and Understand Journal Articles

Now that you have a pile of journal articles, it's important to understand exactly what they are and how to read them. First of all, avoid the temptation to assume a journal article is in itself an indisputable fact. Researchers use journal articles to share new research, discuss theory among experts, and as a forum to share knowledge. They are not an end-product, and no lab says "Well, we published a paper, we're done studying cancer!"

Reading a paper can often be daunting. Depending on the field you're reading about, you may be awash in language you're not familiar with, or mathematical calculations you're not familiar with. That's okay—this is where you get to cheat a little bit. Read the abstract and introduction first and see if the topic is relevant to what you're researching. Read the conclusions to see how the methodology panned out and what the results of the research were, along with suggested avenues of future study. Then go through the data and the methodology if you can, and try to understand how the study was conducted. What was the sample size? How was the study controlled, if a control was necessary? In good papers, all of these things are discussed openly.

The video above does a great job explaining in layman's terms what scholarly journals and academic papers are and how to understand them. Remember, almost every journal article, even if it obtains broad consensus, is a jumping off point for additional study. It's almost never the last word on a topic, and never should be. The beauty of science research is that it's always testing new theories and methods until old patterns and assumptions are either well explained and duplicated or break down entirely.

How to Access to Journals, Research Papers, and Well-Sourced Reference Information

How to Conduct Scientific Research On the Internet (Without Getting Duped) If sitting at home isn't cutting it for you, and you need more or easier access to quality data, you have some options:

  • Visit your local library. Not only will you have free digital access to scholarly journals of all types, you'll get full-text studies that are usually only available to libraries, schools, and research institutions. If you run into a study you can't read at home without paying for, odds are you can read the whole thing digitally or in its journal at the library. Plus, if you need to dig back in time to previous journals and cited sources, doing so from the library makes it easy, since other journals and older editions are at your fingertips. Plus, you can usually print or save the articles for future reference. Photo by Timothy Vollmer.
  • Talk to a Reference Librarian. Another reason to go to the library is to consult with reference librarians. We mentioned the Library of Congress' Ask a Librarian program above. At your local library (or a reference library at your local university or community college) there are real reference librarians willing to help you with your research. Plus, they can offer you something the internet can't: an experienced guiding hand, sorting out good information from bad, and a crafted selection of studies and articles that are really relevant to your topic.
  • Reach out to scientists and science advocates. Sometimes the best way to get your the full text of a study or to ask a pointed question about someone's research is to ask the person who did it. In many cases, researchers will be happy to provide a copy of their paper to someone who's interested, especially if they're trying to educate themselves. If you have a question, many researchers are happy to entertain them to further understanding of their work. Reach out—the worst you can hear is nothing.

The idea that you can't trust the Internet is misplaced. The key is just to find well-sourced, well-cited information on a given topic before you can trust it. It's not even that difficult to do—it's just not something that aligns with the fast-paced world of blog comments and Twitter arguments. Becoming literate in a subject area or even remotely knowledgeable requires time, patience, and a good bit of actual open-minded research. It's not something you can do in time to respond wittily to someone who made you angry on Facebook.

That said, it's worth doing every time. You'll benefit with better understanding of a topic, and you'll be more prepared to have an informed dialogue, make better health and wellness decisions, or get excited about new research in the future.

Title image made using ostill (Shuttstock).

Number of comments