PhraseryPhrasery homeGet Phrasery
Research & comparison21 categories

What is this source not saying?

A press release, vendor page, or announcement that reads suspiciously well.

Longreadingomissioncritical
Read the text below for its omissions rather than its content.

1. What question would a sceptical expert ask first, and does the text answer it?
2. Which numbers are conspicuously absent? Denominators, baselines, time periods, costs, sample sizes, comparison to alternatives.
3. Where is the language doing work that the evidence is not: "up to", "designed to", "may help", "industry-leading", "users report"?
4. What is measured here as a proxy for something the author would rather not measure directly?
5. Who benefits if I believe this, and what would they have said differently if the result had been unflattering?

List the three things I should ask for before taking this at face value.

Source:

Making it yours

  • Paste your own material where the prompt asks for it. Everything above that line is instruction, not content.
  • Delete any rule that does not apply to you. A shorter prompt that fits beats a thorough one that does not.
  • If the answer comes back vague, add a line saying what you do not want. Constraints work better than encouragement.

Reading and synthesis. Getting the substance out of a document, and reconciling sources that do not quite agree.

Related prompts

Keep this one

Phrasery saves prompts with a right-click and puts them back the same way. Add this to your own library in one click.

Add to your browser โ€” free