Science communication potpourri
Over the past few days I’ve been following ScienceOnline2012, mostly via twitter. The agenda for the meeting can be found in the wiki pages.
Below I’ve gathered a small sampling of items that might be of interest or value to others who have an interest in science communication. (Yes, I’m cleaning out all the browser tabs that I opened while the meeting was hurtling forward.)
There were several attempts to offer visual summaries of sessions. For Why do scientists hate and fear the media? Rachel Weidinger offers:
A good written follow-on to this session can be read at the Genomics Blog of GenomeAlberta.
For all writers, or writers-to-be, Maryn McKenna’s concise but excellent summary of tools for writers is worth investigating. Others might prefer different tools or approaches, but it’s good to consider what is available, right?
The self-same Maryn McKenna has provided a Storify account of David Dobbs and Deborah Blum’s session about shape and music as guides to long-form writing structure, which received critical praise. I’m with others in hoping that there will be a video of this particular session.
Videos of many sessions can be found on YouTube by searching for ‘scio12’. The meeting has only just ended and there are already 2 pages of these.
Rather than present many of these, I’ll just present one lighter one and let readers browse the more ‘formal’ sessions for themselves using the search link in the previous paragraph. You mileage may vary (as the saying goes) for this song, but while it’s starts a little weakly in my opinion you’ve got to admit the chorus line is catchy:
Over 17,000* tweets poured out of the meeting under the #scio12 hashtag. They’re still going, but thankfully have slowed down. As for previous years people not physically present at the meeting were able to be involved via twitter.
Footnotes
Update: More links in the comments that follow.
* From memory – I’m too lazy to check it.
Other articles on Code for life:
Media thought: Ask what is known, not the expert’s opinion
When the abstract or conclusions aren’t accurate or enough
Why (some) people don’t trust science
Of use of the active voice by scientists
8 Responses to “Science communication potpourri”
More!
Book-lovers can browse the books that were on display at ScienceOnline2012 (I understand there was some sort of lottery to win books of the attendees choosing):
http://phylogenomics.posterous.com/the-books-of-science-online-2012-scio12-bookp
Should be good ideas for your next read there!
There’s more scribing of sessions here:
http://promega.wordpress.com/2012/01/21/listening-with-intent-to-doodle/
A videos of the session I proposed is hosted at YouTube, courtesy of Tim Skellett (@Gurdur): http://t.co/lb8EyV1O (I haven’t had a chance to view this yet myself.)
They’re already calling out for proposals for next year: http://t.co/kQAOCWRB Next year’s wiki was set up in the closing stages of this year’s meeting. I’ll be filing one proposal later today (time permitting…)
[…] Update: More links in the comments that follow. * From memory – I’m too lazy to check it. Footnotes Other articles on Code for life : Over 17,000* tweets poured out of the meeting under the #scio12 hashtag . Science communication potpourri | Code for Life […]
Friendly correction: It’s Dobbs, not Dodds. (Frequent error….)
Thanks for a nice post.
Hi David,
I’m very sorry about that. I have to admit I’m now thoroughly confused. I actually had the correct spelling when I wrote it, but changed it as I saw someone use the other spelling – so now I’m feeling a bit annoyed with myself as well as confused.
[…] Science communication potpourri […]
For those that had read this far down (!), I’ll likely put up a follow-on post gathering together more material from SciO12 later today – there’s still heaps of it pouring out in the wake of the meeting.
[…] Science communication potpourri […]
[…] Contact « Science communication potpourri […]