Elana Spivack

Elana Spivack is a writer in New York City. She has written for Scientific American, Popular Science, and Inverse, as well as McSweeney’s and Reductress.

Biography:  https://slate.com/author/elana-spivack

64%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermines the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
Analysis.OverallConflictOfInterestScore * 0.3F + Analysis.OverallBiasScore * 0.3F + Analysis.DeceptivenessScore * 0.3F + Analysis.ReadabilityScore * 0.1F

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

The Daily's Verdict

This author has a mixed reputation for journalistic standards. It is advisable to fact-check, scrutinize for bias, and check for conflicts of interest before relying on the author's reporting.

Bias

85%

Examples:

  • The article does not provide any sources or evidence for its claims about the dangers of looking at a solar eclipse without proper eye protection.
  • The author seems to be biased towards promoting the sale of solar eclipse glasses and may have a financial interest in doing so.
  • The author uses fear-mongering tactics such as stating that permanent retinal damage can occur, which is an exaggeration and may be misleading to readers.

Conflicts of Interest

50%

Examples:

  • However, a quick search on the internet reveals that Elana Spivack is also an astrophotographer and may have a vested interest in promoting the sale of solar eclipse glasses as they are essential for capturing images of the event.
  • The author does not explicitly state any conflicts of interest in her article.

Contradictions

85%

Examples:

  • The article also implies that ISO 12312-2 certified glasses are necessary for safe viewing, but does not explain what this standard actually is or why it is superior to other types of filters.
  • The article contradicts itself by saying that it is important to purchase solar eclipse glasses before the event as they may sell out quickly, but then admitting that approved solar eclipse glasses from 2017 will still work for the upcoming event.
  • The article contradicts itself by saying that looking through conventional binoculars or telescopes does not protect your eyes from harmful UV rays, but then recommending them as a way to view the solar eclipse indirectly.
  • The author contradicts herself by saying that solar filters made of black polymer lenses are imperative for safe viewing and protect your eyes from harmful UV rays, but then suggesting that DIY workarounds such as pinhole viewing can also allow you to view the solar eclipse indirectly without hurting your eyes.

Deceptions

50%

Examples:

  • The article uses deceptive practices such as scare tactics and false information to persuade readers to buy solar eclipse glasses.
  • The author also fails to disclose that there are other ways to view the event indirectly without hurting your eyes, such as using binoculars or telescopes with special filters.
  • The author does not provide any sources or evidence for her claims about the dangers of looking at a solar eclipse without proper eye protection.

Recent Articles

Total Solar Eclipse in New Hampshire's Great North Woods on April 8, 2024

Total Solar Eclipse in New Hampshire's Great North Woods on April 8, 2024

Broke On: Tuesday, 05 March 2024 The Great North American Solar Eclipse will occur on April 8, 2024 in New Hampshire's Great North Woods. The mid-afternoon sun will be totally obscured by the moon for about three and a half minutes.