<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Be on The Alert for Unscientific Media Reports!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mindforums.com/be-on-the-alert-for-unscientific-media-reports/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mindforums.com/be-on-the-alert-for-unscientific-media-reports/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 May 2010 14:50:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ace</title>
		<link>http://mindforums.com/be-on-the-alert-for-unscientific-media-reports/comment-page-1/#comment-1521</link>
		<dc:creator>Ace</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 14:41:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mindforums.com/?p=907#comment-1521</guid>
		<description>Part of the explanation is that the WSJ is a financial publication (arguably &quot;THE&quot; financial publication). As such, it caters to investors and traders and provides investigative reporting, not to be confused with scientific research.

If you are an investor and wait for the official scientific publication to make a move on a stock, you&#039;ll be preempted by everybody else who read about it early on and made an educated guess on the outcome based on the available information at the time.

As long as there is full disclosure of all available information at the time of publication it is not out of &quot;the norm&quot;. What would be though, is if bits and pieces are left out on purpose to intentionally sell a [biased and incorrect] point of view. E.g. if this article left out the fact that the official data will be released in a month at an AIDS conference in Paris and therefore implied that these are the final results.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Part of the explanation is that the WSJ is a financial publication (arguably &#8220;THE&#8221; financial publication). As such, it caters to investors and traders and provides investigative reporting, not to be confused with scientific research.</p>
<p>If you are an investor and wait for the official scientific publication to make a move on a stock, you&#8217;ll be preempted by everybody else who read about it early on and made an educated guess on the outcome based on the available information at the time.</p>
<p>As long as there is full disclosure of all available information at the time of publication it is not out of &#8220;the norm&#8221;. What would be though, is if bits and pieces are left out on purpose to intentionally sell a [biased and incorrect] point of view. E.g. if this article left out the fact that the official data will be released in a month at an AIDS conference in Paris and therefore implied that these are the final results.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
