Some very smart bloggers raised many questions of their own about yesterday’s New York Times critique of the Dartmouth Atlas methodology.
“This journalism, like the Dartmouth research on which it draws, isn’t perfect” – Jonathan Cohn on The New Republic blog.
“a confused, woffly attack on Dartmouth from Reed Abelson & Gardiner Harris. This is a dreadful article. Period.” – Matthew Holt on The Health Care Blog.
“How can news reporters avoid making mistakes when reporting on technical issues?” –
Andrew Gelman – on his Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science blog.
“Are Reed Abelson and Gardiner Harris as Big Tools as Their Attempted Trashing of Dartmouth Suggests? Yes. Time to Shut the New York Times for Good” – Brad DeLong on his Grasping Reality with Both Hands blog.
“Others quoted in today’s story indicate that the Times’ piece distorted what they said” – Maggie Maher on her Health Beat blog.
(Addendum 80 minutes after original post:) I meant to include a sixth blogger. Paul Raeburn on the Knight Science Journalism Tracker wrote:
“Reporters Reed Abelson and Gardiner Harris evidently think they have written a story that says the data used to identify potential health savings in Medicare is faulty. They haven’t. Their bias is evident from the start.”