A few years later, I began my foray into science blogging. With a background in general science and a graduate education in public communication (under Matt Nisbet, formerly of Framing Science and now the Age of Engagement) the science blogosphere was an Internet homebase. Then, when Research!America needed a space for an initiative designed to empower scientists to communicate about their own research, a blog seemed like a natural place. Over two years later, we’re still carving out our place in the ever-expanding universe of online information for and by scientists.

@17 Boris – When it comes to trusting the online community (which was a big deal for my employers when we were starting out), I think more is at stake for a blogger to get it wrong.

Mainstream media can have layers – fact checkers, editors, etc. – chiming in, and in someways that reduces the author’s responsibility in the news section. I hope I’m not offending any journalists (who I really respect) by saying that unless it’s an op-ed, I’m WAY more likely to remember where I read something than who wrote it. Blogs are just not that way.

Blogs are intimately linked to their author(s). When it is personal (as most good blogs are), sourcing and reputation for getting it right is even more important – whether there are written standards and ethics or not.

As an employee, I always felt nervous about trying blogging—and my work was not mine to give away. Attitudes and practices around that seem to be shifting, whether employers know this or not, so perhaps I was being old fashioned. Now that I know there are several industry employees that blog, I regret not trying it sooner.

I wish for continued growth, especially in my field (energy and minerals geoscience). I think it would be terrific to see more blogs from applied scientists in commercial organizations and labs. In many ways, this is where science really meets society. Let’s challenge the tradition of secrecy.

I would be interested in what the target audience, the readers, are like. Has any blogger ever tried to find out, what kind of people mainly read science blogs, and for what reason? Can you reach a broader audience, or do they reach journalists who then take the content to a broader audience?

In Germany – certainly in other countries, too – journalists are still sceptical on the role of blogs as media. They don’t trust the “mutual online peer review”, blogs lack journalist standards and ethics – do they need that?

For me as a science journalists, blogs are an inspiration, a way to follow science from a different perspective.

i started blogging in spring of 2002 mostly to offer my opinion on everything. that was the time of the warblogs, so science blogs as such were still in their infancy. mostly it was derek lowe, myself, and a few others. most of you who know me know that blogging has done a lot for me professional, and educationally. i’ve met great people, and shifted from being a workaday programmer to being focused on science. no complaints.

i can’t imagine life *not* blogging. so it’s hard to create a bullet list in my head….

The essence and value of science is free and unencumbered exchange of information … shop talk, if you will. That is what blogs can offer. This should make you do a double take on anyone who says it’s a bad idea.

I guess the explosion of possible wonderful things to distract me has led me to a semi-luddite stance, where I deliberately don’t use tools that would allow me to unhinge my jaw and swallow the science blogosphere whole (if I may mix metaphors). On the other hand, I do follow Bora, so I might not miss out on as much as I think.