A recently published study in Nature has made headlines by claiming that warming is contributing to a significant increase in wildfires in California. While this is a critical issue that deserves our attention, it’s equally important to understand the full context behind the research.

The lead scientist of the study, Dr. Patrick Brown, revealed through a thread on Twitter that certain potentially confounding variables were intentionally not included in the analysis to secure publication in a top-tier journal (Tweeter thread).

As someone who is not a climate scientist, I find it disheartening that the pressure to publish in prestigious outlets can sometimes lead researchers—and even the editorial boards of these journals—to prioritize narrative over nuanced understanding. This phenomenon isn’t isolated to scientific communities; we discussed similar trends in media where national newspapers cater to readers whatever they want to hear in our own paper (Home Country Media Slant on SSRN).

It’s crucial for us, as consumers of information, to be aware of these pressures and to look for a more comprehensive view of any subject matter. This will help us make more informed decisions as we grapple with global challenges like climate change. Unfortunately, it seems that both news and science are also a commodity and not only news and science.