Dive Brief:
- Academics are increasingly pressured to produce work that top news publications will pick up in order to claim success in their fields — sometimes despite flawed methods.
- The New York Times reports that scholars have traditionally spent more than a year going through the peer-review process to publish research but can find more attention and even academic success by getting their work published first in the mainstream media.
- This process lets flawed research into the public discourse, sometimes affecting public policy, and some argue that the shifting definition of success is undermining the rigor of the field.
Dive Insight:
The New York Times is one of the key publications certain scholars have come to look to for coverage of their research. One problem is that journalists repeat the findings of studies they’re not necessarily trained to evaluate. But an arguably more serious one is a problem among academics. The value proposition for publishing success is shifting. Public scholars who appeal to the masses are getting tenure, key job offers, and lucrative book deals. Those interested in doing the serious, important work of figuring out the world in all its intricate complexity cannot appeal to a general audience. Their theories don’t necessarily have a “sexy,” near-term application. But if their work is lost, where is the future in social science?