adamconover

Probably by trying to answer too many questions too fast and as a result making poor word choices that obscure my intended meaning. Seems like the most likely culprit in this sort of format!

We've had a few! Our piece on electric cars in "Adam Ruins Going Green" got some backlash from a writer at The Verge. We felt that the writer had misunderstood our argument in a number of ways, and wrote a response.

Our point was not that "electric cars are always bad" - it's that the amount you reduce your carbon footprint by buying one is extremely variable and often overstated, as is true of all "green products". Even though EVs are a good trend, we can't shop our way out of the climate crisis -- we need to take collective action at the national level.

That said, if people misunderstood the piece, that's partially our fault for not making our point clearly enough! Our research was solid, but our communication could have perhaps used some work. We talk about this further in an upcoming "corrections" episode we have comin' up this season. Look out for it!

Yep! We are doing an episode EXACTLY like this later this year! We have never claimed that the show is 100% right all the time -- we're fallible humans, so that's impossible. Instead, we try to be transparent about our process; and as part of that, this year we're doing a "corrections" episode where we fix some of our errors. Watch out for it, I think you'll like it!

Our research staff generally begins by doing a broad survey of the topic. Our usual M.O. is to find a main source we can use that we are sure will have done their own due diligence on the topic; for instance, the New Yorker has an famously great fact checking department, so if we base a story off a New Yorker article, we can be more sure than usual that it will hold up. Then we dive into that piece's sources, and try to learn as much about the topic as we can. Critically, we look for opposing views, to make sure the angle we're approaching a topic from doesn't conflict with a majority or plurality opinion in the field. And we run our episodes by the experts we have on the show, to make sure they think our argument is fair as well. As for advice for your students - I would say, try to stand on the shoulders of giants! Look for the publications that you know are going to be well sourced and fact-checked, start with those, and then dive deeper into the sources THEY use! And stay curious!

The main difference is that it is BIGGER and FASTER and MORE PRESSURE and oh yeah I guess it's just different in every way? But I am still working with all my friends from CH to make the show, which is really wonderful and a true gift.