Source. The New England Journal of Medicine
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2025 5:46 am
In fact, "publication in a scientific journal", an argument often used to support media hype, is not enough. There are more than 25,000 scientific journals in the world, often in competition with each other, some of which do not have the seriousness of those that are the reference, Science , Nature , New England Journal of Medicine , etc. It is up to the journalist to sort them out.
An example is scientific journals. These renowned israel mobile database publications, which validate their content through a mechanism called "peer review", are in competition to obtain coverage by journalists of the studies they publish. Citations in major media outlets help to increase their "impact factor", in other words the prestige for a scientist to publish their work there. And therefore the appeal of these same journals. They therefore do not hesitate to highlight, in their communication, studies for which they sense a guaranteed media impact, compared to more fundamental and founding research, but less flamboyant. Here too, the discernment of the scientific journalist is useful and necessary.
The dictatorship of the embargo keeps journalists in their comfort zone, with their blessing.
The prestigious journals, which call the shots in the scientific world, offer journalists a preview of the studies they publish, but in return impose a first possible publication date, the famous "embargo". This agreement gives journalists a few days to analyze the scientific work in question, get experts to react, and put it into context - an obviously positive approach. But it has the disadvantage of standardizing the content disseminated in the media, with all journalists working in parallel on the same breakthroughs. For those who take the time and the means to be curious, the thousands of journals contain, far from the embargoes, less flashy research that is just as much excellent subject matter .
An example is scientific journals. These renowned israel mobile database publications, which validate their content through a mechanism called "peer review", are in competition to obtain coverage by journalists of the studies they publish. Citations in major media outlets help to increase their "impact factor", in other words the prestige for a scientist to publish their work there. And therefore the appeal of these same journals. They therefore do not hesitate to highlight, in their communication, studies for which they sense a guaranteed media impact, compared to more fundamental and founding research, but less flamboyant. Here too, the discernment of the scientific journalist is useful and necessary.
The dictatorship of the embargo keeps journalists in their comfort zone, with their blessing.
The prestigious journals, which call the shots in the scientific world, offer journalists a preview of the studies they publish, but in return impose a first possible publication date, the famous "embargo". This agreement gives journalists a few days to analyze the scientific work in question, get experts to react, and put it into context - an obviously positive approach. But it has the disadvantage of standardizing the content disseminated in the media, with all journalists working in parallel on the same breakthroughs. For those who take the time and the means to be curious, the thousands of journals contain, far from the embargoes, less flashy research that is just as much excellent subject matter .