If so, you should read this, print it out and stick it on the side of your computer monitor. Then re-read it every time you sit down to write a post discussing actual scientific research.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
On Tor.com over the last couple of years, Kate Nepveu has been taking us through a chapter-by-chapter re-read of The Lord of the Rings. In each post she would give a brief summary of the action as well as some commentary.
It's been a great project and it's just come to an end in the last week or…
I'm following Dave's lead here, who was following Nick Hornby's lead, who could probably be made aware of our lead following and then wax poetic on the flourishing of his format. Except I'm sure he's busy. Lunching with Cusack. Unless Cusack is lunching with Anjelica Huston, like in The Player…
Unlike the previous post, this is not a rhetorical question that I will ask and then answer. I genuinely do not know the answer. I could Google it, of course, but I'd like to see if somebody reading this is able to deduce the correct answer from the available evidence.
So, here's the deal: as an…
Ed Yong went to the World Conference of Science Journalists, and came back with both an award (yay!) and some thoughts on embargoes and science journalism. What's got me thinking is not so much the issue of embargoes - I'm not trying to compete with science journalists, and wouldn't have time to…
What if you want to write for a scientific audience ? Blogs are not only useful for science dissemination.
Sure, that is a different style altogether.
But most of us (at least at this point in the history of blogging) write mainly for the lay audience. Or for scientists in different fields who would not otherwise be able to understand the actual papers - we bring in the history and context to explain why the presented work matters.
I posted a comment over at Cognitive Daily. Dave's description is way too long to post on the side of my monitor. If you want the short version, according to me, it's "get the science right" or,
ACCURACY, ACCURACY, ACCURACY
Ha! Of course. Without it all else is superflous. But once you get Accuracy right, Dave's advice is golden.