We cast the problem of communicating scientific uncertainty as one of reporting a posterior distribution on an unknown parameter to an audience of Bayesian decision‐makers. We establish novel bounds on the audience's regret when the analyst reports an approximation to a posterior that the audience treats as exact. Under a palatable restriction on the audience's decision problems, the bounds take an especially convenient form. Under a further restriction on the audience's priors, a bootstrap distribution can be used as a stand‐in posterior. We propose a practical recipe for checking whether a conventional statistical report (say, a normal parameterized by a point estimate and standard error) is a good approximation, and for improving the report if it is not. We illustrate our proposals using the articles in the 2021 American Economic Review that use a bootstrap for inference.

We construct a new index of media slant that measures the similarity of a news outlet's language to that of a congressional Republican or Democrat. We estimate a model of newspaper demand that incorporates slant explicitly, estimate the slant that would be chosen if newspapers independently maximized their own profits, and compare these profit-maximizing points with firms' actual choices. We find that readers have an economically significant preference for like-minded news. Firms respond strongly to consumer preferences, which account for roughly 20 percent of the variation in measured slant in our sample. By contrast, the identity of a newspaper's owner explains far less of the variation in slant.

We study the problem of measuring group differences in choices when the dimensionality of the choice set is large. We show that standard approaches suffer from a severe finite‐sample bias, and we propose an estimator that applies recent advances in machine learning to address this bias. We apply this method to measure trends in the partisanship of congressional speech from 1873 to 2016, defining partisanship to be the ease with which an observer could infer a congressperson's party from a single utterance. Our estimates imply that partisanship is far greater in recent years than in the past, and that it increased sharply in the early 1990s after remaining low and relatively constant over the preceding century.