NASA: sad but true graph

submit to reddit

Hemant Mehta sent me a link to this graph from GraphJam:


NASA graph of coverage in the news


It’s a joke (duh), but I’d say that’s true for the mainstream media. On blogs, though, it’s a different story. After all, Cassini, MESSENGER, Hubble, Spitzer, Chandra — these all get positive coverage here. And APOD has tons of NASA shots, and it’s the biggest astronomy/space site on teh interwebs.

Blogs rule.

October 26th, 2008 2:30 PM by Phil Plait in Humor, NASA | 20 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >

20 Responses to “NASA: sad but true graph”

  1. 1.   Viewer 3 Says:

    Oh, whew- thank goodness you stepped in to clear away the fog of uncertainty with your wisdom by clarifying that it was just a joke. For I moment I actually thought this graph was making a statement that the media refuses to cover our advances in alien communication.

  2. 2.   IVAN3MAN Says:

    Story of my life!

  3. 3.   Davidlpf Says:

    Things blow up things at Nasa? Was that while the Mythbusters were there. I seem to remember something about a women in a diaper.

  4. 4.   zaardvark Says:

    Also, unfortunate love triangles…

  5. 5.   justcorbly Says:

    For all the effort NASA puts into PR, it can’t seem to eradicate two stubborn myths that affect the public discourse about its mission.

    First is the myth that NASA’s budget is an exorbitantly large and growing slice of the federal pie. People make all kinds of claims without any seeming reference to actual budget numbers.

    Second is the notion that, at least in terms of human spaceflight, NASA runs an independent shop. The reality is that the parameters of NASA human spaceflight mission have always been established by the White House. Kennedy directed NASA to go to the Moon. Bush directed NASA to go back. In between, the various occupants of the White House were essentially content with watching NASA run in circles.

  6. 6.   ccpetersen Says:

    It’s pretty easy to do this kind of graph; I did a similar one in grad school showing the rise of public opinion about HST over time after the launch. at the time I used Nexis to do the search.

    MSM is not going to be your “go to place” for all things science — if you did that, you’d never get past UFOs in Texas and beached whales…

  7. 7.   MarkH Says:

    @justcorbly

    That’s why when ever I see a dumd post railing against NASA’s budget I ALWAYS respond by compairing the DOD annual budget to NASA’s. Thing is, I never seem to get a responce to those posts ;)

    Heck I even compaired the R&D budget of the DOD to NASA’s… R&D has about 10 times the annual for NASA.

  8. 8.   Oded Says:

    Sorry, this graph makes no sense, it sums up to 200%!

  9. 9.   Ibeechu Says:

    Oded, I was just about to type that.

  10. 10.   T.phillips Says:

    Well, I’m sure as soon as they achieve “alien communication” that bar of the graph will shoot right up.

  11. 11.   Jadehawk Says:

    oded and ibeechu, i think that’s “100% of topic covered”, not “as a percentage of stories about nasa”

  12. 12.   José Says:

    Why isn’t covering up alien communications on there?

  13. 13.   Aaron Gibbons Says:

    The graph adds up to 200%

  14. 14.   Jeremy Says:

    The 200% is part of the gag, people.

  15. 15.   José Says:

    Everyone complaining about 200%, is at least a 110% wrong.

  16. 16.   Steve A Says:

    I can add a little addendum to this. (Bravo, Phil for doing this post)

    There are mainstream media that does cover NASA news, but they are papers in areas where there is a NASA center, because that center means a lot to the lives of people in the area, and there you’ll see a lot more coverage. For instance, Florida Today, Orlando Sentinel, and Houston Chronicle all cover a day by day account of shuttle missions and any spacewalks.

    Big science news does get coverage, but its not 100% definite, and mostly in a weekly section.

  17. 17.   Charles Says:

    Yeah, it’s pretty funny but I don’t think there’s any accuracy here.
    I’d think that over the last year most major market publications have had at least a tidbit on:
    Spitzer
    Cassini
    Chandra
    Kibo
    Kaguya
    Messenger
    Chandrayaan-1
    Something on Virgin Galactic
    Something on SETI
    a story on SpaceX
    and an update on the Hubble situation.

    Not enough coverage – but certainly not zero as depicted.

    I know the graph above is being silly, but I really would like to see a graph that seriously covers positive vs negative space news.

    I guess what this graph really illustrates is that the negative news “sticks” more that the positive with the general public. If not, I don’t think any of us would find it funny.

  18. 18.   ccpetersen Says:

    Well, yes it’s kind of a joke, but in the joke lies some element of truth about how NASA is perceived.

    Steve A: you are correct about the weekly section– we used to call it the ‘Science ghetto’… as if science is so out of the mainstream that it needs its own page, totally ignoring how much a part of our lives science is…

    I blame it on the fact that in school we had science class and english class and art class and for some reason never did science or art or language arts mix… when, indeed, they should have!

  19. 19.   Invader Xan Says:

    It seems a lot of the cool things NASA actually do go largely unreported lately…

    Take IBEX, for instance. Most people seem to havenot even noticed it. A couple of times I’ve even seen a news headling saying something along the lines of “Probe X lands successfully on Mars” — to which I stop and think “Hang on… I don’t remember hearing about that one.”

    Everyone (especially in the news, it seems) gets so hung up on things going wrong sometimes, they forget to mention when things go right!

  20. 20.   TheWalruss Says:

    Hehehe – this graph clearly doesn’t consider Weekly World News to be main-stream. :-0

Leave a Reply