32 karma · joined March 22, 2009
That sounds like a negative result DOES mean you don't have it, but a positive result DOESNT mean you do.
Edit: I guess this is just misleading and you actually can get false negatives.
I would like it to be illegal for a news organization or an advertisement to lie to or mislead the public.
If you survey 1000 doctors, and 4 say yes, you better not put "4 out of 5 doctors surveyed" in your ad.
I would never want to stereotype the entire population of earth and say that you're a failure if you're not an expert at something. Is it good to be an expert? Of course. But it's not required - there are many paths to life.
In most cases, the answer is no. But for a source that has proven time and again to produce content that makes you feel stupider after reading/viewing it, then I think a flag based on source is justifiable. I'm not saying whether Tech Crunch fits this category, but I'm sure we can all think of some sources that do.
That's what I thought.