I had the pleasure this week to make a trip to Québec City, one of the most beautiful places in the world. I was meeting with the Vice-Presidents of Research at Canada’s top universities. The group was in a good mood because the day before, the federal government’s budget was tabled and it contained new research funding for Canadian universities.

The topic of my presentation was Combating Canada’s disinformation epidemic and how The Conversation worked with Canadian academics to produce research-based explanatory journalism and expert analysis on the day’s top stories.

As loyal readers, you know our mission is to share knowledge to help people make informed decisions about important issues in their lives. The meeting in Québec City included a healthy debate about the lack of trust in journalism and academia – often as a result of criticism from politicians who don’t like the facts produced by reporters and researchers because it’s not aligned with their agendas. But we also talked about the dangers of echo chambers: how can universities and journalists make sure they are reaching a wide spectrum of people?

That is a tough challenge for sure. Every week, we receive angry emails from people who don’t like a research-based story we published (climate articles are a special target) – even though it’s clear they haven’t actually read the article. Some people won’t open their minds. But, as I told the group of Canada’s top research academics, our goal is to find those people who are still willing to consider information that they may not agree with or may be new to them. Even if we have to do it one reader at a time!

I’ve assembled some great research-based stories that we published this week. I hope you find them interesting – and maybe you can share them with friends or family who are looking to expand their knowledge.

---

Legal update: You may recall that last weekend, I wrote about our upcoming day in court regarding our ongoing quest to be recognized as a Qualified Canadian Journalism Organization. The hearing in Federal Court was held Monday. Justice Christine Pallotta, who heard the case, reserved judgment – meaning we won’t likely know the results for several weeks.

Have a great weekend. We’ll be back in your Inbox on Monday.