Reply to comment

We have here a post on scienceblog.com which links to an article in a second source which decries the practice of a third source simply reprinting press releases. Most of the material here on science blog itself is just press release reprints--sometimes attributed, sometimes not. Coglanglab being an exception, of course.

What we almost never see, here or elsewhere, is links to the actual research. Sometimes that research appears in refereed journals which can't be viewed for free--though even in these cases links to abstracts and purchase pages could be provided. (Better yet, arXiv pre-prints) Other times, the research hasn't been accepted or even submitted to journals. We are at the mercy of the original press release author, who is likely not a scientist and likely has the best interest of their employers at heart.

I'd like to see a new standard in science reporting, kind of like the Nutrition Facts block on packaged foods. All press releases and subsequent materials based on them should have a standard block stating who did the research, who paid them, when and where and if the research has been peer-reviewed, and whether the author of the current piece was involved in the research.