Scott Alexander argues that a New York Times article misrepresented economists' views on school vouchers, offering evidence and proposing a bet to prove the article was misleading.
Longer summary
Scott Alexander critiques a New York Times article that claimed economists generally don't support school vouchers. He argues the article misrepresented survey data and gave a misleading impression. Scott points out that the data could be interpreted to support the opposite conclusion, that the article's phrasing likely led readers to an incorrect understanding of economists' views, and that a follow-up survey showed much stronger economist support for vouchers. He offers to bet that most readers would get a false impression from the article, initially agreeing to a bet with Noah Smith, though this later fell through.
Shorter summary