nisbetmc | November 20, 2007
At the Columbia Journalism Review, managing editor Brent Cunningham argues for a new journalistic beat that covers the obscuring uses of language and messaging in politics. The essay is part of a special issue devoted to "Orwell in '08."
The benefits of a "rhetoric and framing" beat would be obvious and sorely needed, as he asks:
What if on 9/11 our major media outlets had employed reporters whose sole job it was to cover the rhetoric of politics--to parse the language of our elected leaders, challenge it, and explain the thinking behind it, the potential power it can have to legitimize…
nisbetmc | November 17, 2007
Neil deGrasse Tyson understands the central role of framing in communication and it's a major reason that Tyson is perhaps the most effective science popularizer of his generation. In a fascinating interview on this week's Point of Inquiry, here's how Tyson describes his philosophy and approach to reaching non-traditional audiences via the media (at about 11:40 minutes into the interview):
GROTHE Do you think that mass media, going that route, do you think it undercuts your science education agenda because you have to speak in sound bites, you have to reduce it down to the simplest terms…
nisbetmc | November 13, 2007Pew has posted advertising revenue analysis for major magazines over the past year. Not surprisingly, the "big three" news magazines continue to suffer, other mags such as The New Yorker hold steady, while the celebrity magazines continue to thrive. As Pew reports:
It's been a rough year for the three major U.S. newsweeklies and a boom year for the celebrity/gossip magazines, according to the most recent advertising numbers released by the Publishers Information Bureau (PIB), measuring ad pages in about 250 titles.
The 2007 ad pages are down substantially at the two biggest newsweeklies. Time…
nisbetmc | November 13, 2007
Pundits and journalists continue to speculate about whether or not conservative Republicans will get strongly behind a Rudy Giuliani presidential run. As it stands right now, according to a recent Gallup survey, for the great majority of Republicans, the heuristics of likability, party loyalty, and Rudy's national security message appear to trump the Mayor's stands on abortion and gay rights. Yet for a strongly committed conservative minority, these issues do raise objections.
In the Oct. 12-14 poll, 61% of Republicans say Giuliani's views on abortion and gay rights either make no difference…
nisbetmc | November 10, 2007
The studios of Point of Inquiry
For those in the DC area, Wednesday evening I will be speaking at the one year anniversary of the Center for Inquiry's Public Policy office [Details Below]. Also making remarks will be DJ Grothe, host of the popular Point of Inquiry podcast series. Recently celebrating its 100th episode, POI has hosted many notable discussions of issues related to science, religion, and public engagement. At Framing Science I have spotlighted several of these guests' remarks including those of Paul Kurtz, Carol Tavris, and Phil Kitcher.
First Anniversary Party!
Wednesday,…
nisbetmc | November 9, 2007Each Monday evening in November, AAAS is sponsoring a series of panel discussions on major issues in science and technology policy. The panels are hosted by NPR reporters Joe Palca and Richard Harris. See details below:
AAAS Invites You to a New Discussion Series
Science & Society: Grand Challenges
No powerpoint. No notes.
Just candid conversations with leading scientists,
economists, and politicians hosted by award-winning NPR reporters
Joe Palca and Richard Harris.
Monday, November 12th topic: Meeting Global Energy Demands
AAAS Auditorium, 1200 New York Ave, NW, Washington, D.C.
About…
nisbetmc | November 7, 2007
"Sandwalk" blogger Larry Moran
If the blog debate that ensued after publication of our article at Science showed anything, it was just how widely misunderstood the concept of framing might be. Not surprisingly, many bloggers offer strong opinions about framing and its relationship to science communication but have very little actual knowledge or expertise in the area. In particular, many bloggers continue to connect framing to debates over atheism and religion, which is an unfortunate distraction. Another distortion is the assumption that anyone can just go out and "start framing," when…
nisbetmc | November 3, 2007
[Image from Salon.com feature on panelist Barbara J. King]
Full details are now available for the previously announced panel on Communicating Science in a Religious America at February's AAAS meetings in Boston.
180-Minute Symposium
Communicating Science in a Religious America
Sunday, Feb 17, 2008, 1:45 PM - 4:45 PM
Synopsis:
Over the coming decades, as society faces major collective choices on issues such as climate change, biomedical research, and nanotechnology, scientists and their organizations will need to work together with religious communities to formulate effective policies and to…
nisbetmc | November 1, 2007
As I have detailed in past studies and as we write in the cover article at The Scientist, the dominant frame that appears when science turns political is the "strategy" frame. This is a journalist driven package that ignores the substance of the scientific issue or debate and instead employs an election-like emphasis on personalities, tactics, and who's ahead in winning the policy battle. Often this package becomes prominent when coverage shifts from the science beat to the political beat. It is under these conditions that "false balance" is most likely to appear in coverage of science.
The…
nisbetmc | November 1, 2007
Gallup has released its latest tracking data on American views of NASA. As Gallup describes, according to the Sept. 14-16 poll, 56% of Americans rate the job NASA is doing in positive terms, with 16% saying it is doing an "excellent" job and 40% a "good" job. Meanwhile, just 8% say it is doing a poor job, with most of the rest describing NASA's performance as "only fair."
According to Gallup, NASA has had less-than-majority positive evaluations just twice since 1990, when Gallup first asked this question. The initial 46% rating in July 1990 came shortly after a flaw in the Hubble telescope…
nisbetmc | October 23, 2007It's going to be a busy 24 hours.
On Wednesday evening I will be at the Center for Inquiry-NYC for the latest in our Speaking Science 2.0 tour. Then I will head back to DC for a Thursday morning press conference where I will be talking about a report that argues for new directions in communicating about poverty and low wage work. Sponsored by Inclusion and the Joyce Foundation, details are posted below. I will have much more to say about the report later this week.
Directly after the press conference, I drive to Bucknell University where I will meet back up with Chris Mooney for a Thursday…
nisbetmc | October 23, 2007The latest issue of The Chronicle of Higher Education (sub, text below) runs an "at a glance" spotlight on our cover article at The Scientist.
A Glance at the October Issue of The Scientist: The Framing of Science
By JASON M. BRESLOW
The way most experts see it, "ignorance is at the root of conflict over science," write two communication scholars, but many "ignore the possibility that their communication efforts might be part of the problem."
The authors--Matthew C. Nisbet, an assistant professor of communication at American University, and Dietram A. Scheufele, a professor of journalism…
nisbetmc | October 22, 2007David Goldston and I had a great discussion at WAMU-NPR's Kojo Namdi Show today. We were also joined later in the program by Francesca Grifo, Director of the Scientific Integrity Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists. You can listen to the archived audio here.
nisbetmc | October 21, 2007Tomorrow (Monday) at 1pm EST I will be joined by Nature columnist and former House Science committee Chief of Staff David Goldston as a guest on WAMU's Kojo Nmandi Show. The program will focus on the connections between science policy, scientists, and the public. At WAMU's Web site, you can listen to the program live or later via the audio archive.
Scientists vs. Politicians in Public Policy
What happens when cutting-edge science gets caught in the middle of political and ethical debates? Today, many decisions about issues like global warming and stem-cell research are influenced by people…
nisbetmc | October 19, 2007Science magazine runs the following news report on Gore's Nobel prize and his impact on the policy debate and public opinion. The article quotes Steve Schneider, Michael Oppenheimer, Robert Watson, and other key scientists who note the immense importance of Gore's work on climate change over the years.
Climate researchers have known Gore as the rare policymaker who brings scientists in--and listens. When he visited Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, New York, as a senator, recalls geochemist Wallace Broecker, "he said, 'I don't want a tour. I just want to sit around a table with…
nisbetmc | October 17, 2007In a new regular column over at DesmogBlog, Chris Mooney elaborates on the arguments first offered here. We should applaud Gore, writes Chris, but we also need to draw on data and evidence in order to accurately evaluate his impact and consider what else needs to be done:
However, there's one arena in which we seriously ought to criticize the Gore communications juggernaut--it just isn't the realm of scientific accuracy. Rather, the true issue is the one that Matthew Nisbet has been highlighting, and what I might term the "Gore paradox": Gore is our top mass media communicator on climate…
nisbetmc | October 17, 2007
It's another busy week on the road giving presentations, trading ideas, and meeting a lot of really smart and dedicated people. Yesterday, via video conference, I spoke as part of a panel at a National Academies' meeting on science and technology advice in state policy decisions. Joining me on the panel for a very interesting discussion about science communication were Marla Cone of the Los Angeles Times, William Harrack, Professor of Engineering at the University of Illinois, and John McDonald, President of Stone's Throw Strategic Communications.
Tomorrow I will be at NSF headquarters to…
nisbetmc | October 17, 2007
In the United States, when it comes to public perceptions of Gore's climate message and Nobel award, partisanship is serving as the strongest of perceptual screens, triggered in part by the chorus of conservative media attacking Gore's accomplishments and challenging the science behind his claims.
Consider the clip above from Fox News Sunday. In the roundtable discussion, Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol leads by deriding Gore for "bloviating" about climate change while people die in Iraq and Burma. Conservative columnist Charles Krauthamer adopts the now familiar talking points,…
nisbetmc | October 16, 2007height="350">
A break from serious matters for a focus on music...
Last night I strolled down to the 930 Club, one of the top indie rock venues in the country to catch Cat Power. The band delivered as some of the best rock-blues-folk fusion since Janice Joplin.
Next week, however, is the season's big event, featuring Spoon and the Shins in concert. If you haven't caught Spoon's latest album, listen to this review at NPR, and catch their buzz generating performance last week at Saturday Night Live (youtube above).
nisbetmc | October 13, 2007
One of the reasons why Al Gore's communication campaign has had limited success in activating the American public on climate change is that only half of adults have a favorable opinion of the former Vice President. Not only do pre-conceived notions about Gore serve as a perceptual screen in interpreting his climate crisis message, such hardened opinions don't augur well for the many of us who have been hoping that Gore would run for president. Indeed, as a recent Gallup analysis reviews, polls from Marist and Pew indicate that half of Americans would never consider voting for Gore as…