We Used Broadband Data We Shouldn’t Have
I&#x27;m probably being too harsh but...<p>Good on them for writing this, it&#x27;s important to admit when you&#x27;re wrong. However, I feel like this outlet has a larger responsibility to be actual data analysts as well as journalists (over say a more traditional journalist for a more traditional news outlet). As such, why was the analysis done in the postmortem article not done prior to publishing the original articles? A good analyst is one you can trust, and trust for an analyst is built by drawing conclusions from highly defensible data, and highly defensible data is data which has undergone sever scrutiny of the analyst <i>before</i> conclusions are drawn, not after. Also, they should probably update the now erroneous articles with a disclaimer indicating that much of the research is now invalid.