Bloomberg Spy Chip Piece Doesn’t Pass Peer Review

Under a minute read
| Link

With the famous Bloomberg spy chip article, other news organizations have attempted to copy Bloomberg’s research. But they haven’t gotten the same results.

According to a company source, editorial staff has been “frustrated” that competing news organizations haven’t managed to match the scoop. Sources tell the Erik Wemple Blog that the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and The [Washington] Post have each sunk resources into confirming the story, only to come up empty-handed.

In science, peer review is an important part of scientific research. If other scientists follow the exact methodology you used, and they get the same results, your experiment is valid. But if they don’t get the same results, there is something wrong with your experiment.

Check It Out: Bloomberg Spy Chip Piece Doesn’t Pass Peer Review

Bloomberg Spy Chip Piece Doesn’t Pass Peer Review

One Comment Add a comment

  1. geoduck

    As Carl Sagan said Extraordenary Claims Require Extraordenary Evidence. Bloomberg has provided nothing to back up their claim. In fact their claim has not only been rejected by those implicated, but independant experts have said that what is alleged is not possible. It doesn’t work that way. Bloomberg got played.

Add a Comment

Log in to comment (TMO, Twitter, Facebook) or Register for a TMO Account