Fascinating article. Though one expects better of The Guardian - from their misunderstanding of the proper use of the word protagonist, through to the bewildering closing comment:

"As the Tim Hunt affair showed, sexist attitudes are ingrained in science, as in the rest of our culture."

There seems to be an abundance of these kinds of stories about science that eschew scientific method in their own interpretation and conclusions.

I apologize for my ignorance, but this article seems to forget to mention what exactly Watson's contribution was. From reading this one gets the impression he rather delayed than accelerated the important discoveries. Surely this wasn't the case. Can anyone comment on this?

Regardless of the answer to the question in the headline, Rosalind Franklin not receiving the Nobel Prize was and always will be a disgusting travesty.