Pages

Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts

Saturday, September 22, 2012

Science Cheerleaders on The Today Show

Make no mistake: the Science Cheerleaders are getting attention. In addition to their previous appearances with the public, they've appeared in stories across a wide range of media (try to think of another cheerleading squad that appears on ESPN, CNN, and The Chronicle of Higher Education!). Their latest appearance? The Today Show on Friday morning, September 21! You can watch the video on the Science Cheerleader site here. It's a great story, told without snark or irony, making it well worth the wait (some of the footage was shot in April!).

I was on hand during the Science & Engineering Festival, manning the booth while the SciCheers did their cool science cheer thing. It's good to be the gofer, but I've got to lose some weight if I'm going to continue wearing the SciCheer shirts!

Hanging out at the SciCheer booth with Erin (degrees in biology and psychology, with a Ph.D. and Master's degree in the works) and Allison (degrees in chemistry and biology).

The 2012 Science Cheerleader squad with their fearless gopher. Yes, folks, that's a real job, and no, you can't have it.

Thursday, August 20, 2009

Potpourri XCVII

More going on in the blathersphere, so let's get started.

Mahmoud Ahmedenijad is now going to allow the IAEA inspect "key" nuclear sites in Iran. Bart's cynical translation: they're hiding the weapons, these sites are political theater to show whoever believes him that he can "play ball" with the West.

From Lin, an article about how the Healthcare Bill (H.R. 3200, Title II, Section 246) has "no federal payment for undocument aliens." Here's the actual language from the bill, which is an exceptionally small section:

SEC. 246 NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS.
Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.

I guess I'm stupid here, but the way I read this is that the federal government will not pay for undocumented aliens. CNS is saying the opposite. This is why it pays for private citizens to read the bill rather than trust any news source. They continue:

"neither bill has a provision for verifying citizenship status, according to these experts."

Okay, that sounds plausible; perhaps because the bill assumes that said status verification is covered by the other laws it references. But, again, reading the bill is worthwhile. I still like the idea of vouchers for a minimum amount of money for the uninsured to spend on private insurance. That's got to be cheaper and less complicated than having government gobble up the healthcare industry.

Did you know NASA has a site for tracking the most recent passes of near-Earth objects (NEOs)? These are big rocks passing by very quickly--like kilometers a second. Yowie! There have been some close ones.

Dar the Science Cheerleader did a radio interview on WXRX in Toronto. Fun, and cute. Kinda like Dar.

And that, as they say, is that.

Thursday, April 30, 2009

Media Coverage of the H1N1 Virus

The U.S. national media is covering the H1N1 virus (swine flu) story like the Orlando media cover a hurricane. There are always two subtexts in such stories:

  1. There is no need to panic.
  2. We are all going to die.

It makes life interesting. In any case, with two reported/possible cases in a Madison County school, all Madison County schools have been closed today, and some for as much as a week. I expect a quiet day at work today.

Sunday, March 15, 2009

Journalism Evolving, Not Dying

For my friends who lament the continuing demise of traditional newspapers:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.99c75c577fa1a698c1689adb0e008445.ca1&show_article=1

I'll probably have more links later today. Some interesting reading in The New Atlantis, if you haven't read it before.

Tuesday, December 30, 2008

Today's Suggested Reading

I've been meaning to post this for awhile: http://www.csicop.org/scienceandmedia/definitions/. It's an article recommended by Darlene the Science Cheerleader on what, specifically, we mean by scientific literacy. I leave its implications as an exercise for the reader.

*

Another item that's been on my desk for awhile, but which I haven't had time to write about is the idea of a "science court," wherein the great scientific issues of the day would be decided by a tribunal of scientists who are NOT experts in the fields under discussion--i.e., you wouldn't have climatologists with vested interests deciding the validity of global warming claims--but scientists of sufficient experience, education, and merit to be able to make decisions more or less objectively. The court would deal specifically and only with the facts and theories of a particular discipline--i.e., which theory is more "correct"--not with their policy implications.

The more I read this article, the more dubious I became about the science court's prospects. Suppose, for example, the science court was televised. The general public, watching a very slick and impassioned presentation might think that that person had "won," whereas the scientists on the panel might have a completely different reaction based strictly on the data. Mightn't this sort of environment encourage claimants to "play to the gallery?" Or would the science court necessarily be a closed event?

Also, since Arthur Kantrowitz first proposed this idea, science has become even more politicized than it was in the '70s and '80s. Even scientists not directly connected to a particular issue more often than not have opinions on such things. But then I suppose the same thing could be said about courts of law, and yet we continue to have some faith in an unbiased judicial system.

Tuesday, December 02, 2008

Random Stories from the Net

Count de Monet: "Your highness, the peasants are revolting!"
Louis XVI: "You're right, they stink on ice!"

--History of the World Part I

In the same spirit, consider this moment of condescension from Senator Harry Reid: http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/YeasandNays/Reid_We_wont_smell_the_tourists_anymore_12_02_2008.html

*

President-elect Obama is being warned that Iran might have a nuclear weapon during the first year of his term: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article5275647.ece

*

High tides continue to flood Venice: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081202/D94QNEN81.html

*

Talk about offering up a pound of flesh...

"As part of its plan, Ford announced that the salary of Ford CEO Alan Mulally would be cut to $1 a year if Ford actually borrowed money from the government."

Imagine you're in one of the lifeboats from the Titanic as you watch the liner sink toward a watery grave. Would you actually feel better, and would your own personal situation be improved, if you knew that Captain Smith was going to receive a pay cut? Yes, I'm serious.

*

The attackers in Mumbai came from Pakistan. http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/12/02/asia/mumbai.php. This, of course, surprises no one who's read the history of India or seen the movie about Mohandas K. Gandhi.

*

That's about enough surfing for now. Let's be careful out there.

Monday, December 01, 2008

Well, Duhhhhh...

Psssst! Hey, did you know that we were in a recession? It MUST be true! I saw it on CNN.com!

http://money.cnn.com/2008/12/01/news/economy/recession/index.htm?cnn=yes

Of course the Wizards of the Obvious in Atlanta have also been saying that we were on the verge of a major economic downturn since the beginning of the Bush administration. Now they've got what they wanted. I hope they're happy.

What's utterly amazing about this is that once it's "official" that we're in a recession, the Dow decided to drop another 600+ points. It's like a man is having desperate pains in his chest and arms, but until a doctor comes by and says, "You're having a heart attack," it isn't really real.

Monday, June 09, 2008

DVD Review: ISDC Space Media Session

I'm finally getting caught up on the videos I purchased from the video guys covering the ISDC. I'm not in a huge rush to do this--I covered most of the sessions I wanted to cover in my first posting--so I'm watching these one at a time. Starting from the top of the pile, I picked up the Space Media panel.

First, a quality issue: the audio on this disk was bad. My friend and fellow space blogger Jeff Foust, who hosted the panel, appeared to have his microphone tied into the video people's audio system. However, all of the panelists were audible only through reverberation in ISDC's "the big room," the DC Hilton's Presidential Ballroom. The mikes were not connected to the camera, and the video (admittedly, it only cost me $5) suffered because of it.

Panelists included:

Dave Brody, LiveScience.com
Mark Mayfield, Ad Astra Magazine
Keith Cowing, NASA Watch
Warren Leary, New York Times
Glenn Reynolds, Instapundit.com

The first question Jeff asked was whether the quality of information has improved for the space business, given the profusion of blogs, electronic information sources, etc.

Due to microphone issues, Mr. Leary's response was inaudible. Reynolds stated that the blogosphere offers magazines opportunities to obtain writers for on-the-spot reporting. Mayfield expressed concerns about accuracy in the blogosphere, but Keith Cowing ("I was blogging about space before the word 'blogging' was invented") believed that the blogosphere was inherently self-correcting, as fact-checking bloggers will correct others who get their facts wrong. As he put it, if your blog says something stupidly wrong, nobody's going to read it. Brody felt that blogs offer interesting sidebars to the traditional NASA media outlets.

Brody brought up the fact that a congressman broadcast live video from the Mars Phoenix Lander's landing via his cell phone. Brody felt this sort of reporting provided real-time commentary of a live event, but needed to be taken for what it was--often unvarnished opinion--and that such reports can make confusion of the facts occur that much more quickly.

Cowing noted that when he started NASAWatch, NASA felt threatened, asking him, "How dare you challenge us? How dare you interpret this stuff for us?" That attitude, more than anything, is enough to justify the democratic tendencies of the blogosphere, however uncomfortable it makes government officials.

Cowing did admit that "there's a certain responsibility for [blogging]" and that he "publishes admission of mistakes faster than I made them, and keep them up longer." Not always, says I, but I also confess to being a regular reader of his site, so he must be doing something right.

Mayfield noted that "Anything we say or do could be on YouTube in minutes."

Reynolds said that one advantage of the blogosphere is its ability to form groups around a story--individuals who are sufficiently interested in a story/topic will each contribute their own piece of the elephant (my favorite analogy, not his), and that they will bring depth to a story the mainstream media might cover briefly at best.

Jeff's next question was, "How do the new media affect space advocacy organizations like the National Space Society?"

Reynolds stated that activist organizations offer a particular function: activism.

Mayfield said that society magazines like Ad Astra exist to share the NSS mission with its members. Ad Astr is a cheerleader for the membership, as it should be. Content for advocacy magazines should be visually exciting and literarily compelling, and are better for analyzing issues in the "long form."

However, Reynolds cautioned that the traditional advocacy model of direct mailings and fundraising are outdated, and that newsletters and magazines are dying--they don't fit the role they once had, which was providing information heretofore not available anywhere else.

Brody said that it was becoming more difficult for advocacy organizations to raise money in traditional ways, though the internet is good for building and maintaining communities. Advocacy organizations need to "seize the conversation."

Leary warned about the dangers of advocates speaking only to themselves. For example, there are still segments of the national and world population who are NOT "wired" via cell phones, internet, etc. What are advocates doing to reach out to them?

Jeff then opened the questioning up to the floor. My pal Cassie Kloberdanz asked, "How do you get the [new] media to bridge across multiple demographics?"

Cowing's recommendations included:
"Be interesting."
"Find a niche."
"Pick a target you know about and start writing about it."

Brody: "Be passionate.
"Get your facts straight."
"Establish credibility."

Cassie followed up with "How do we reach the general public?"

Reynolds, who recently wrote a column for Popular Mechanics about lunar property rights, suggested reaching out to more mainstream or non-traditional publications.

Mayfield indicated that it's difficult selling space to young people today because teachers don't talk about space in science classes as much (I doubt this is universally true, but he might have a point).

Cowing threw in: "The worst people space advocates could talk to is each other."

Leary suggested joining a non-space organization (PTA, church group, etc.) and "force space down their throats."

Jeff Liss, former editor of Ad Astra, suggested that NSS, et al., had done well enough getting its message out to the general public, but that perhaps we hadn't made enough of an impact on media leaders.

Cowing replied that people want to know: "When do I get to go?" something NASA doesn't want to talk about. He added that "logic is not going to work."

Mayfield suggested that "No matter what you think about space tourism...it's a new form of marketing....The public doesn't care [about science]."

Brody got in the last comment, focusing on getting out good stories: "[Space Solar Power] in a high carbon footprint world is a good story."

Unfortunately, this session happened on Thursday, which was the day I flew in. Other questions might have occurred to me, had I been there. Plus, it would've been nice to hear what everyone was saying. Bottom line for me on this panel was that these guys are just making it up as they go along. They see the value of the internet--it's where most of them earn their bread and butter--but they don't have any crystal balls into what might happen next.

One question occurs to me, which I'll try to keep short: "Say one of these cell-phone bloggers posts a sensational video that's damaging to space exploration, but dead wrong. With our society's short-attention span, what can more respectable bloggers do to undo the damage of 'the first report' if that's all that gets reported by the mainstream media?"

We shall see. Gosh knows I'll do my part.