Science of Blogging video pussy wet pissing
Science, meet World
Archive for December, 2010
Science of Blogging Blog-cation: Happy Holidays
Dec 22nd
Just a quick note to let everyone know we will be taking a holiday break from blogging and will return with tons of fantastic new content and new guest science bloggers in the New Year.
Happy Holidays! And apologies for the creepy Santa picture - apparently he isn’t a fan of new technology.
Peter
How readable is your blog? A quantitative assessment of science blog accessibility
Dec 20th
Editor’s Note: Over the weekend Colin Schultz started a great discussion on his blog about the reading level of science blogs. He has graciously offered to share his thoughts on Science of Blogging. Also, just in case you were wondering, you can also check the readability of your blog by heading over to Google and typing in “site:YourBlog.com” and clicking on the Advanced Search link, right below the regular “Search” button. From the options under the heading “Reading Level”, select “annotate results with reading level” and presto! You have yourself an assessment of the reading level of your particular blog. And now here’s Colin.
What grade are you in?
If you’re an adult, that’s probably not a question you’ve had to think about in a while. According to the pieces of paper on my wall, I’m in 17th grade. If you have a PhD, you’re a bit higher. If you never had an opportunity at post-secondary education, then you’re in 12th grade, or lower still if you didn’t complete highschool. Your level of education isn’t a perfect measure of your reading ability, but it is a decent estimate.
[Ed: This is frightening, but I (Peter) have technically completed a total of 23 grades: high-school until grade 13 (old Ontario system), plus 4 undergrad, 2 MSc and 4 PhD.]
Now, let’s say that two weeks ago you got wrapped up in the excitement about the discovery of a bacteria that can supposedly use arsenic in its DNA. It was intriguing, everyone seemed to be really excited about it, and you wanted to know more.
So, where could you turn?
If you sometimes go by Dr., you probably had a decent chance at working your way through the original study. If you are early in your university career, Ed Yong had you covered. If you are still in highschool, and you wanted to know what other scientists thought of the research, then Carl Zimmer had a story just for you.
These suggestions aren’t based on the level of technical depth or the amount of detail in the science, but are instead based on the different stories’ estimated reading levels. One of the most common assessments of reading level (and the one that comes bundled with Microsoft Word) is the Flesch-Kincaid readability test. Using the number of syllables, words and sentences in a piece of writing, the test spits out the school grade for which the writing is best suited.
Newspapers, which try to make their writing as accessible as possible, often try to keep their reading level at or below that expected of a high-schooler. Improving readability makes it easier for people to understand the point, and will probably improve the odds of keeping the reader around all the way to the end of an article. Much like writing that over-uses jargon, if readers have to work to get through a piece of writing, they will probably just tune out.
Now, I’m not sure exactly how they do it (and it may not be perfect*), but Google has started letting you filter your searches by readability. The results aren’t as detailed as the Flesch-Kincaid test. Rather, a site’s content is split into three buckets: basic, intermediate, or advanced. More >
Who uses Twitter? Less than 3% of internet users do so regularly.
Dec 15th
Everyone is certainly talking about it. Most companies, news agencies, and entrepreneurs have Twitter accounts. Although I’ve been on Twitter since early 2009, most of my real-life friends and colleagues only vaguely understand what Twitter is and how it can be used.
Thus, I shouldn’t be surprised that only 8% of internet users in the the US report using Twitter, according to a recent Pew survey.
However, of those 8% of internet users who happen to use Twitter, only a third (36%) use the service regularly by checking for material posted by others on a daily basis or multiple times per day. I guess (if I lived in the US) I would be included in this rather small fraction of regular Twitter users.
On the other hand, 42% of Twitter users check the site less than every few weeks, or never.
Thus, in effect, less than 3% of US internet users are regular Twitter users (2.9%).
Despite the discouraging statistics, I’ve certainly have had no trouble finding interesting people to connect with on Twitter. More >
To be or not to be a pseudonymous blogger
Dec 13th
Editor’s Note: As a follow up to Scicurious’ excellent post on how to start a science blog, today Sci discusses the pros and cons of authoring a blog under a pseudonym. As one of the most recognizable pseudonymous science bloggers, Sci knows a thing or two about the topic. And take it from me - Sci takes her pseudonymity very seriously. When we met at a conference last year, she continued to go by Scicurious. To this day, I have not the slightest clue what her real name might be. I certainly would have slipped up by now.
Sci has a pseudonym, and while it’s fine sometimes with other bloggers, many real life people discount me because they think I am “anonymous” and cannot be serious. Keep in mind that pseudonymity and anonymity are different things. While anyone can be “anonymous” and their voices will change all the time, a pseudonym is a fake name that is constant through time as one or more specific people with specific voices. This means that you can, over time and with quality work, build up the trust of people who read you, and develop a reputation online as your pseudonym.
There are often good reasons for being a pseud. Many people assume that those writing under a pseudonym must be cowards, trolls, or otherwise untrustworthy. While this is true for some pseuds, not all pseudonyms are equal, and with time you can recognize those who work to build up reputations under their pseudonym. The reality is that there are lots of good reasons to be pseudonymous, from worries about people not taking you seriously, to professional considerations. Sci is a pseud because I don’t want animal rights activists coming after the real life work I do, not to mention the work of my colleagues, just because I’m supportive of carefully performed animal research (yes, I’ve gotten death threats, and I’m by no means the only one). More >
Science Bloggers: Diversifying the news
Dec 8th
Editor’s Note: When we said we wanted Science of Blogging to pick the brains of the best and brightest in the online science world, we weren’t kidding! Today, I’m excited to share a wonderful post by fellow Canadian, Colin Shultz. Colin is a science journalist, who regularly discusses fascinating topics on his blog and is uber-active on Twitter. In fact, Twitter, is how Colin and I connected. Today, Colin discusses the notion that science blogs may be a key supplement to traditional media in reporting science to the public.
So you know that old, sorry debate about science journalism versus science blogging? The one where the mainstream media are the legitimate suppliers of news about the world, and bloggers are resigned to being snarky commentators?
Or how about the one where blogging creates an echo chamber, where the diversity of sources withers, leaving people in a pool of ideology-reinforcing consistency.
Well have I got some news for you!
These arguments may not only be patently illogical, but rather, the opposite might be true.
In a recent study in the journal Journalism Studies, Gina Walejko and Thomas Ksiazek, both PhD students at Northwestern University, compared the sources that traditional journalists, political bloggers, and science bloggers each turn to when producing their posts. More >
8 Tips on Starting a Science Blog
Dec 6th
Editor’s Note: We could not be more delighted to have Scicurious, one of the top science bloggers out there, share her plentiful wisdom on how to start a science blog. Scicurious is a fellow ex-ScienceBlogs blogger, and now runs a fascinating blog called Neurotic Physiology over at the Scientopia network. All of Sci’s posts are brilliant and engaging, and her “Friday Weird Science” series can not be missed. Here’s Scicurious!
So You Want to Start a Science Blog?
Good for you! No doubt you are looking forward to huge amounts of flattery and fame, millions of hits, and a whole line of merchandise with your face plastered all over it.
Well, maybe those goals are a bit lofty.
Nonetheless, Science Blogging is important. It’s a great way to increase communication between scientists and the public. It’s a good way to do outreach and get more people interested in science. It’s an excellent way to learn to analyze papers and get feedback on your analysis in a public forum. And it’s a really good way to improve your writing skills!
But of course, everyone wants to know where to start. In my case, I pretty much just started a blog, and learned as I went. School of hard knocks and all that. But there’s no reason that you should have to do the same, and starting a blog doesn’t have to be uphill through the snow both ways.
Over the years, I have collected some tips on blogging and things to think about as you get started. And Peter has been kind enough to let me share them with you! More >
Can you trust a science blog?
Dec 2nd
I recently came across a new editorial in Analytics Chemistry by Royce Murray entitled, Science Blogs and Caveat Emptor.
The main thesis of the editorial is that you can trust peer-reviewed literature, you can trust mainstream science news, but when it comes to science blogs – caveat emptor.
Murray states the following:
“I firmly believe that [peer-review] has served science well and that the scientific literature has provided generally reliable information and vast benefits to society over the centuries to the present and will continue doing so into the future.”
Thus, the past, present and future of science communication is in peer-reviewed journals, which he encourages should be judged on quality using tried, tested, and true measures such as journal impact factors.
When it comes to science blogging, Murray is much less romantic in his views:
“I believe that the current phenomenon of “bloggers” should be of serious concern to scientists.”
Bloggers should concern scientists, because, presumably, these two groups of people are separate entities. Scientists who also blog apparently do not exist.
Next, Murray gives away a bit of how distanced he is from the subject matter he is discussing.
“Bloggers are entrepreneurs who sell “news” (more properly, opinion) to mass media: internet, radio, TV, and to some extent print news.”
Over the years I have come to know numerous science bloggers, many of whom are also practicing scientists, and I’m not sure any of them would be captured by this definition.
As a scientist and a science blogger, I have yet to “sell news” to mass media. Fingers crossed, though. More >
