John Oliver: Funny & Insightful Science Video

  • Thread starter Thread starter micromass
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Science
AI Thread Summary
The discussion highlights the effectiveness of a video that succinctly covers complex subjects in under half an hour while remaining engaging and informative. It acknowledges the possibility of a team behind the production, contributing to its polished presentation. A key criticism raised is the media's tendency to sensationalize new studies and misrepresent scientific findings, which can lead to public misunderstanding. The conversation also addresses the pressure within the academic community to publish, noting instances of the same research being published in multiple journals or conferences with minimal new information. Concerns are expressed about the peer review process, where some papers are published despite previous rejections, indicating potential flaws in the review system. Overall, the discussion underscores issues of media portrayal of science, the trivialization of scientific research, and the challenges of maintaining integrity in academic publishing.
micromass
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Messages
22,169
Reaction score
3,327
Very funny and insightful video:

 
  • Like
Likes StevieTNZ, ShayanJ, Greg Bernhardt and 3 others
Physics news on Phys.org
The cool thing I find about that guy in my opinion is how he manages to compress to less than half an hour a lengthy subject (of anything he talks about) and still make it precise, accurate, informational, and attractive to hear.

I say "he manages to compress", but there's probably a whole team working on and stuff (perhaps helping with editing and such).
 
Haha! Nice!
 
His criticism of how the media sensationalizes 'new' studies, or any study, or otherwise portrays science or scientists, is warranted.

And then there is the pressure on the part of many to publish. I often see the same paper published in different journals without much new information, and sometimes, the same work is published at multiple conferences.

I know of some cases were reviewers rejected papers that were subsequently published, and so, sometimes, garbage gets published.
 
Astronuc said:
I know of some cases were reviewers rejected papers that were subsequently published, and so, sometimes, garbage gets published.

Just because a reviewer rejects a paper, that doesn't mean it shouldn't get published. It's a big red flag though.
 
micromass said:
Just because a reviewer rejects a paper, that doesn't mean it shouldn't get published. It's a big red flag though.
Two reviewers rejected the paper, and there was some problems with the work, not to mention that the paper failed to address something that in the paper was claimed would be addressed. One of the authors was a former student of the editor of the prestigious international journal. But I digress.

Three of Oliver's criticisms are how the media portrays science, or scientific studies, how popsci trivializes science, and in some cases, how some institutions or individuals misrepresent scientific matters or mislead the public.
 
Last edited:
Similar to the 2024 thread, here I start the 2025 thread. As always it is getting increasingly difficult to predict, so I will make a list based on other article predictions. You can also leave your prediction here. Here are the predictions of 2024 that did not make it: Peter Shor, David Deutsch and all the rest of the quantum computing community (various sources) Pablo Jarrillo Herrero, Allan McDonald and Rafi Bistritzer for magic angle in twisted graphene (various sources) Christoph...
Thread 'My experience as a hostage'
I believe it was the summer of 2001 that I made a trip to Peru for my work. I was a private contractor doing automation engineering and programming for various companies, including Frito Lay. Frito had purchased a snack food plant near Lima, Peru, and sent me down to oversee the upgrades to the systems and the startup. Peru was still suffering the ills of a recent civil war and I knew it was dicey, but the money was too good to pass up. It was a long trip to Lima; about 14 hours of airtime...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
345
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
7K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top