John Timmer
@jtimmer.bsky.social
Ars Technica's science editor. Various other things that are far less interesting.
Check my author profile on Ars for my email. jtimmer.95 on Signal.
Check my author profile on Ars for my email. jtimmer.95 on Signal.
Wow, is it possible to get a single physical copy to see if it works for someone I'm caring for?
November 26, 2025 at 10:49 PM
Wow, is it possible to get a single physical copy to see if it works for someone I'm caring for?
There would have been a lot more outlets back then to stretch out a thin concept, too. Sadly.
November 26, 2025 at 7:55 PM
There would have been a lot more outlets back then to stretch out a thin concept, too. Sadly.
The WSJ:
News side provides perfectly normal reporting of the event.
Editorial side has 50/50 odds of either mild disapproval or something completely unhinged.
News side provides perfectly normal reporting of the event.
Editorial side has 50/50 odds of either mild disapproval or something completely unhinged.
November 26, 2025 at 7:51 PM
The WSJ:
News side provides perfectly normal reporting of the event.
Editorial side has 50/50 odds of either mild disapproval or something completely unhinged.
News side provides perfectly normal reporting of the event.
Editorial side has 50/50 odds of either mild disapproval or something completely unhinged.
How could I forget the WSJ?
November 26, 2025 at 7:49 PM
How could I forget the WSJ?
The New Yorker:
Assigns Chotiner to interview the gun. Gun wisely flees the country and starts living off the grid in Southeast Asia.
Assigns Chotiner to interview the gun. Gun wisely flees the country and starts living off the grid in Southeast Asia.
November 26, 2025 at 7:10 PM
The New Yorker:
Assigns Chotiner to interview the gun. Gun wisely flees the country and starts living off the grid in Southeast Asia.
Assigns Chotiner to interview the gun. Gun wisely flees the country and starts living off the grid in Southeast Asia.
The Atlantic:
You did not know it was possible to find someone willing to write a "contrary to popular wisdom" take on foot shooting, but somehow they managed it.
You did not know it was possible to find someone willing to write a "contrary to popular wisdom" take on foot shooting, but somehow they managed it.
November 26, 2025 at 7:10 PM
The Atlantic:
You did not know it was possible to find someone willing to write a "contrary to popular wisdom" take on foot shooting, but somehow they managed it.
You did not know it was possible to find someone willing to write a "contrary to popular wisdom" take on foot shooting, but somehow they managed it.
Politico:
Does a deep dive on how foot shooting polls in red states. Steadfastly refuses to address the wisdom of pulling the trigger.
Does a deep dive on how foot shooting polls in red states. Steadfastly refuses to address the wisdom of pulling the trigger.
November 26, 2025 at 7:10 PM
Politico:
Does a deep dive on how foot shooting polls in red states. Steadfastly refuses to address the wisdom of pulling the trigger.
Does a deep dive on how foot shooting polls in red states. Steadfastly refuses to address the wisdom of pulling the trigger.
A short video of the shooting is prepped by Aaron Rupar and gets commented on more often than the combined populations of China and India.
November 26, 2025 at 7:10 PM
A short video of the shooting is prepped by Aaron Rupar and gets commented on more often than the combined populations of China and India.
Quanta:
A new mathematical theorem may help us model the trajectory of both the fragments of shoe and the blood spatters simultaneously.
(❤️ you, Quanta)
A new mathematical theorem may help us model the trajectory of both the fragments of shoe and the blood spatters simultaneously.
(❤️ you, Quanta)
November 26, 2025 at 7:10 PM
Quanta:
A new mathematical theorem may help us model the trajectory of both the fragments of shoe and the blood spatters simultaneously.
(❤️ you, Quanta)
A new mathematical theorem may help us model the trajectory of both the fragments of shoe and the blood spatters simultaneously.
(❤️ you, Quanta)
The Bulwark:
People who you never thought in a million years you'd be agreeing with and who can't wait to argue with you over substantive policy issues once democracy is safe nevertheless agree that this is a clear sign of Trump's mental decline.
People who you never thought in a million years you'd be agreeing with and who can't wait to argue with you over substantive policy issues once democracy is safe nevertheless agree that this is a clear sign of Trump's mental decline.
November 26, 2025 at 7:10 PM
The Bulwark:
People who you never thought in a million years you'd be agreeing with and who can't wait to argue with you over substantive policy issues once democracy is safe nevertheless agree that this is a clear sign of Trump's mental decline.
People who you never thought in a million years you'd be agreeing with and who can't wait to argue with you over substantive policy issues once democracy is safe nevertheless agree that this is a clear sign of Trump's mental decline.
The LA Times:
Waits for Patrick Soon-Shiong to tell them it's ok to cover it.
Waits for Patrick Soon-Shiong to tell them it's ok to cover it.
November 26, 2025 at 7:10 PM
The LA Times:
Waits for Patrick Soon-Shiong to tell them it's ok to cover it.
Waits for Patrick Soon-Shiong to tell them it's ok to cover it.
Fox News:
"The shoe was an illegal"
"Boom in shoe sales set to drive economy upward"
"Feet are traditionally a Democratic constituency"
"This shows the importance of unimpeded access to firearms"
"The shoe was an illegal"
"Boom in shoe sales set to drive economy upward"
"Feet are traditionally a Democratic constituency"
"This shows the importance of unimpeded access to firearms"
November 26, 2025 at 7:10 PM
Fox News:
"The shoe was an illegal"
"Boom in shoe sales set to drive economy upward"
"Feet are traditionally a Democratic constituency"
"This shows the importance of unimpeded access to firearms"
"The shoe was an illegal"
"Boom in shoe sales set to drive economy upward"
"Feet are traditionally a Democratic constituency"
"This shows the importance of unimpeded access to firearms"
CNN:
Hosts a panel discussion where everyone just stares incredulously at Scott Jennings as he tries to justify this as a brilliant strategic move.
Hosts a panel discussion where everyone just stares incredulously at Scott Jennings as he tries to justify this as a brilliant strategic move.
November 26, 2025 at 7:10 PM
CNN:
Hosts a panel discussion where everyone just stares incredulously at Scott Jennings as he tries to justify this as a brilliant strategic move.
Hosts a panel discussion where everyone just stares incredulously at Scott Jennings as he tries to justify this as a brilliant strategic move.
The WaPo:
Struggles to find anyone who hasn't taken early retirement to report on the shooting. Editorial section struggles to find a reason that the shooting will boost private enterprise.
Struggles to find anyone who hasn't taken early retirement to report on the shooting. Editorial section struggles to find a reason that the shooting will boost private enterprise.
November 26, 2025 at 7:10 PM
The WaPo:
Struggles to find anyone who hasn't taken early retirement to report on the shooting. Editorial section struggles to find a reason that the shooting will boost private enterprise.
Struggles to find anyone who hasn't taken early retirement to report on the shooting. Editorial section struggles to find a reason that the shooting will boost private enterprise.
The NYT:
The political and editorial sections both-sides the question of whether feet are useful, staff collectively discovers 18 new euphemisms for "shoot", and a 47 person reporting team exhaustively traces the entire purchase history of the gun through its 22 previous owners.
The political and editorial sections both-sides the question of whether feet are useful, staff collectively discovers 18 new euphemisms for "shoot", and a 47 person reporting team exhaustively traces the entire purchase history of the gun through its 22 previous owners.
November 26, 2025 at 7:10 PM
The NYT:
The political and editorial sections both-sides the question of whether feet are useful, staff collectively discovers 18 new euphemisms for "shoot", and a 47 person reporting team exhaustively traces the entire purchase history of the gun through its 22 previous owners.
The political and editorial sections both-sides the question of whether feet are useful, staff collectively discovers 18 new euphemisms for "shoot", and a 47 person reporting team exhaustively traces the entire purchase history of the gun through its 22 previous owners.
Reposted by John Timmer
If you _do_ want to know the true science on the environmental consequences of offshore wind development, we did a story based on two different systematic reviews, plus a bunch of other studies, in this piece:
hakaimagazine.com/news/offshor...
hakaimagazine.com/news/offshor...
Environmentally, Offshore Wind Is … Fine | Hakai Magazine
How often can you say that about an energy generation system?
hakaimagazine.com
November 26, 2025 at 4:04 PM
If you _do_ want to know the true science on the environmental consequences of offshore wind development, we did a story based on two different systematic reviews, plus a bunch of other studies, in this piece:
hakaimagazine.com/news/offshor...
hakaimagazine.com/news/offshor...
Scuttle Buttin’ was never meant to be played quietly.
November 26, 2025 at 12:29 PM
Scuttle Buttin’ was never meant to be played quietly.
I blame the "what's a Yeti?" contingent.
November 26, 2025 at 12:23 AM
I blame the "what's a Yeti?" contingent.
To me, the issue is the internal editorial structure that keeps the political reporter from walking over to the science desk/slack channel and saying "hey, could you look over my coverage quickly and identify potential problems". So, I'd place this at the feet of the most senior editors.
November 26, 2025 at 12:22 AM
To me, the issue is the internal editorial structure that keeps the political reporter from walking over to the science desk/slack channel and saying "hey, could you look over my coverage quickly and identify potential problems". So, I'd place this at the feet of the most senior editors.
Reposted by John Timmer
Journalism is not simply regurgitating facts. It is *certainly* not simply repeating what someone else said -- even if that person is famous. Rather, journalism should offer the reader a service. It should not only share information, but place that information in context.
November 25, 2025 at 4:26 PM
Journalism is not simply regurgitating facts. It is *certainly* not simply repeating what someone else said -- even if that person is famous. Rather, journalism should offer the reader a service. It should not only share information, but place that information in context.