1. clock
  2. So, which cover do you like better?

So, which cover do you like better?

By clock on June 18, 2007.

This one?

Or this one?

Framing Science is not just verbal. Visual aspects are also important.

Tags
Framing Science
science reporting

More like this

Just a quick update on 'framing science'
Matt Nisbet analyses George Will and Chris Mooney responds to some more recent discussions. Matt talks about framing on NPR (listen here) and now they both have an article published in the Washington Post. Also, check out some older articles by Matt and Chris, including this one on CSI and this…
ON STEM CELL BILLS, BUSH & CO. WIN THE BATTLE OF THE VISUAL: SC Proponents Worked PR Wonders to Get This Far, But the Power of the Bully Pulpit Is Hard to Beat; Embryo Research is Transformed Visually Into Research on "Young Humans"
I'm sorting through all the news coverage this week, and will be having posts forthcoming summarizing the major frames and narratives that appeared in Editorials, Op-Eds, soundbites, and news coverage, but to start, the most stunning outcome from yesterday's veto was to witness the clear dominance…
An example of framing
What is this photograph about? In one setting, this is a story about water. It even says so in the top left corner. In a post about water policy or aquifers in Kansas, you'd have no trouble appreciating this as an illustration. That isn't what I was thinking when I took the picture though.…
2008 NSF Science Indicators Focuses on Framing & Sci Comm
The National Science Foundation has released a PDF version of the 2008 edition of Science Indicators. Every two years, Chapter 7 of the report reviews the latest research tracking public opinion about science and technology. Over the coming weeks, I will be posting regularly about key implications…

I like the one that is

a) factually correct;
b) does not oversimplify yet is understandable; and
c) very very sexy.

It's a tossup between the two. Plain white on black all neat and square and stuff is kind of sexy.

I like the Lancet cover. It's in humans and not hyped up cell cultures.

I like the first (elements) best because its presentation is clear while the second design seems cluttered.

kinda depends on the goal....i like elegant and succinct (i.e. plain) for the 'real deal'...for technical papers.

But I enjoy a flashier design for review articles or more popular science articles.

I'm voting Lancet on this one (and not just to be a pest either). It is clear, conveys a good bit of information, and to an intellecturally mature audience conveys a lot more excitement than the Cell cover does. Why? When I see the cell cover, I think "hype, spin, glossy, and dummed-down for the non-scientist". When I see the Lancet cover, I think "damn, the editors must really think this result is so astounding, so strong, and so important, that just the one crisp sentence is all the advertisement needed".

And the Lancet (and Cell too, to some extent) is not for your casual non-scientist audience -- it is a scientific journal, by and for scientists.