The First Step to Telling the Truth: Ban Truthiness from Science Writing

truthiness (noun)
1. “truth that comes from the gut, not books” (Stephen Colbert)

    2. the quality of preferring concepts or facts one wishes to be true, rather than concepts or facts known to be true

In my life, truthiness does not play a larger position in my decisions within the realm of science. I leave my diagnosis to the doctors and trust researchers. Researchers have more knowledge and avenues to collect knowledge than I do. However, I will read many scholarly articles based on the same topic if I do not agree with the initial findings even though I may not comprehend all of science. I may not use my gut to tell me the truthiness, but can trust my gut, in my opinion, if a doctor appears to have misdiagnosed me. I am the sick one, of course.

The question is: should a science writer base stories solely on the truth or is it acceptable/responsible/ethical to write something truthy? It is difficult to argue with scientific facts because of the time and research invested. As stated in the previous post, science is not always right. However, as a science writer, one cannot make up “science” based on one’s gut. If one wants to pass themselves off as a science writer, one must write about true science that is based on research in a laboratory with a researcher, not truthy science that is based on gut.

As Abraham Lincoln said, “I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts.” If science writers decide to hide the truth from the public through using truthiness, advances cannot be made. No matter how horrible the truth, it is our job to report it. There will be times that we, as science writers, do not agree with the truth. The right thing to do may be to avoid writing the article. Now, that sounds just as misguided as presenting the wrong information, but there are other science writers. The world isn’t only looking to one for information. The thing is: if you don’t feel comfortable putting your name on the article, don’t do it.

According to Bo Bennett, “For every good reason there is to lie, there is a better reason to tell the truth.” And for every good reason there is to substitute truthiness, there is an even more compelling reason to tell the truth. When science writers begin to enter the realm of truthiness, readers become confused. Even though one science writer reports truthiness doesn’t mean that another won’t report the truth. Too many conflicting stories confuse readers, resulting in the loss of trust in science and science writers. That is and will never be our goal. Therefore, ban truthiness in our writing and report only the truth!