I suppose I should have said "Internet journalism." With "journalism" in very heavy air quotes. The problem is that people see Psychology Today, a known publication, and think they are getting something that has actually been fact-checked and edited for like, 5 seconds. Also, the proliferation of pay-for-publication fake-o Internet scientific journals is making this all even muddier. And nobody, but nobody ever actually goes to the source and reads the cited articles (most of which are behind a paywall anyway, unless they're the aforementioned fake-o type). My Facebook feed is full of people posting nutball junk about GMOs and vaccination from sites like naturalnews.com. These friends of mine have degrees and ought to know better, but the sites fake themselves up to look marginally science-y if you aren't really paying attention. This isn't even taking into account the fact that many real scientific articles are questionable.
