http://blog.dilbert.com/post/109880240641/sciences-biggest-fail

Just look at those TV and papers promoted by big Google

Mainstream science reporters have typically taken peer review as an official stamp of approval from the research community that a published finding is sufficiently robust to share with their readers. Yet this kind of evidence-based reporting is only as reliable as the evidence it reports on. This is one reason why the rise of the scientist (and non-scientist) as blogger, along with other forms of post-publication review, has been so valuable.

Editorial: A ranking of the best science-news outlets misjudges the relationship between research and reporting.

 

Mainstream science reporters

 

 

Science … is not always the answer
Donate for Health Research