Referencing

Historically information was scarce, but now, due to the internet information is in overabundance and it's difficult to know what to trust. Wikipedia has tried to combat this issue, by listing which sources are most reliable and excluding those which prefer clicks over fact:

Figure 2. Oligopoly of popular media.

However, the word reliable simply implies sources are not making things up. Reliability of factual accuracy does not take into account the potential biases of each source or framing of issues to make it more digestible to specific consumers. So for fact, we need to look at the scientific literature, which should be able to deduct framing and bias to get at the root of an issue.

Scientific Bias

Figure 3. Oligopoly of Scientific Journals.

Despite continuous efforts to eliminate bias in scientific research, it is never perfect. A pivotal concern is the funding of these studies—often sponsored by private entities seeking a return on their investment, an influence that can subtly distort scientific findings.

Another contributing factor to bias is the predominant method of disseminating research through scientific journals, most of which are controlled by a handful of private corporations (See Figure 3). These entities hold the power to approve or dismiss studies, potentially shaping the scientific discourse to reflect their own agendas. This gatekeeping may be a contributing factor to the replication crisis, where a significant number of studies cannot be reliably replicated by other researchers.

Therefore, while scientific literature is generally more scrutinized than popular media, it is not immune to bias. In response, BurnZero has implemented a critical analysis weighting system. This approach prioritizes sources believed to be less influenced by bias, fostering a more objective understanding of scientific findings.