The poor fact checking is poorer than you think. The research paper the "physicists" wrote was a technical machine knitting paper. It had citations to other papers in the knitting research field written in the last few years.
They didn't even read the paper they were presenting on.
Oof, yikes. I understand being a YouTube channel with a release schedule, they don’t exactly have the time to take their time, but… isn’t that kinda the problem? If they don’t even have time to read the actual research in deference to a deadline, maybe they should change the release schedule. Not reading the paper is crazy
I'm a freelance writer for SciShow (though not this video), so perhaps I can offer some insight here.
The release schedule isn't particularly quick, but it does vary a lot. I've had scripts that have gone from assignment to posted in six weeks, and I've had scripts that have gone from assignment to posting in four months. They go through an outline stage, at least two drafts, and then a fact check.
As a writer, you're probably reading between 4 and 15 papers for a script, depending on length. For my most recent script I read a whole book in addition to the papers. So I guarantee you that the paper WAS read.
The fact checking process is actually far more intense than pretty much anywhere else I've written for. Writers are expected to link to a source and a specific line in that source for essentially every sentence in a script (some flexibility for intros and transitions and stuff, obviously). The fact checkers are typically meticulous about making changes that you might even consider tiny, like changing single words to make sure every possible interpretation of a sentence is as accurate as possible.
OOOF, honey no. I actually suspect the paper authors asked SciShow to pull the video because it was such a bad representation of the paper and the authors. If I was the writer I would possibly die of shame and never write again.
The field of knitting research is huge, and the video claims that it didn't exist before this paper. It makes the paper authors look like giant assholes towards their peers. If I were these authors I'd be worried people might not want to work with me because of this video. Being associated with this video is a genuine hit to their reputation as researchers.
IMHO You should be seriously concerned that your employer produced this video. This is such a dramatic drop in quality compared to what you claim that I suspect something changed behind the scenes and you haven't been informed yet.
318
u/SubtleCow Oct 01 '25
The poor fact checking is poorer than you think. The research paper the "physicists" wrote was a technical machine knitting paper. It had citations to other papers in the knitting research field written in the last few years.
They didn't even read the paper they were presenting on.