This is a guest post by Dr. Jeffrey H. Toney, an educator and scientist whose career has spanned academia and the pharmaceutical industry, and currently serves as the dean of the College of Natural, Applied and Health Sciences at Kean University. He blogs regularly at ScienceBlogs, NJ Voices, OpEdNews and The Huffington Post.

Sex sells…but can science?  Grabbing a consumer’s attention using sex goes beyond branding.  In fact:

…sex is an inherent, inseparable brand message. It is the message.

Scientific messages are becoming increasingly apparent in advertisements, whether as claims of health benefits (“clinically proven”) or trumpeting a “scientific breakthrough” displayed, inexplicably, by showing chemical structures or dramatic hi-tech animations.  This is a curious schizophrenia.  On the one hand, the public is often disinterested and skeptical of scientific claims, often confusing facts with opinions.  Evolution and climate change are obvious examples.

Coverage of science in the news media has declined dramatically:

“For every five hours of cable news, less than a minute is devoted to science; 46 percent of Americans reject evolution and think the Earth is less than 10,000 years old; the number of newspapers with weekly science sections has shrunken by two-thirds over the past several decades.”

On the other hand, use of science within advertising somehow bestows upon the product a higher status, a gravitas, the excitement that this thing that the consumer must have is one of a kind, a rare breakthrough discovery.  More perplexing is the way that science is presented in these ads – as something mysterious (chemical structures fly across the screen), as something utterly confusing to the non-scientist. (more…)

I’ve already praised the film Ikland, but I wanted to embed some sample videos to show how charming the film is, even as it is also very grave and serious when it comes to its claims about the misrepresentation of the Ik tribe. But meanwhile, here is my friend Cevin smiling in the face of the severe danger their journey presents:

And here is one of the film’s characters, Nicole, um, flirting with a resident:

While I was at MIT and living in Cambridge, MA, I met many talented and fascinating people, among them filmmaker and musician Cevin Soling (perhaps most famous for Boris the Dog and The War on Kids) and filmmaker and movie editor David Hilbert.

Now, they’ve collaborated on a great new film that you should know about. It’s called Ikland, and subtitled, “A Film About the Worst People in the World.” That’s ironic: The Ik are a tribe in northern Uganda who were famously described in anthropologist Colin Turnbull’s 1972 influential book The Mountain People. Only, Soling argues that in his negative depiction of the Ik, Turnbull got it very wrong.

So Soling and his crew venture into Uganda–a very dangerous trip–to try to meet the tribe that Turnbull criticized–and the result is this film. Here’s the trailer:

I particularly like the unusual filmic style, which you can see in the trailer–black background with many scenes unfolding in multiple windows. It adds a very cool and different quality–if I only hadn’t quit film studies back in college I could probably say something more profound about it.

Bottom line is, check out Ikland. In the end, the film might be best described as a unique attempt to repeat a famous scientific experiment (Turnbull’s)–one that, in the testing, comes up with a very different outcome.

I’ve been blogging since 2006: First at The Nexus followed by four years at The Intersection with Chris. My writing has evolved tremendously since then, and in many ways, so have I.  Now I’m about to begin a new chapter..

I’m thrilled to announce I’ll be writing the monthly science column for Bloomberg View. This is the upcoming opinion page from Bloomberg News, led by David Shipley and James Rubin.

I’m equally delighted to announce I’ve joined Wired Science Blogs. My blog will launch in a couple of weeks, so for now I’ll say I’m very excited about the theme. (In the mean time, watch for clues coming via Twitter). Of course, since blogs exist in virtual space, I’m not really going anywhere and will just be a different hyperlink away.

It’s been incredible to share the terrific Discover network with so many esteemed colleagues and friends since 2009! Special thanks to Amos, Eliza, Ed, Phil, Razib, Carl, Henry, Corey, and of course, Chris for all of your support.  I also appreciate the warm welcome at both Wired Science and Bloomberg where I’m honored to be joining two new families of talented writers.

(more…)

To celebrate, astronomers at the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore, Md. pointed Hubble’s eye at this pair of interacting galaxies called Arp 273. Just beautiful.

The NSF GK-12 program is an outstanding example of an initiative tackling science illiteracy head on. It prepares graduate students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics to be better communicators by bringing them into K-12 classrooms. They work closely with students and teachers through hands-on activities and make science real and relevant for the communities where they are instituted. I’ve worked with many students and professionals involved in this wonderful program over the years and have been extremely impressed. Many colleagues and friends who have participated say GK-12 has had a tremendous influence on their trajectories beyond graduate school. As I visit universities to talk about improving science communication, many professors bring up their own experiences with this initiative and praise the way it brings science to students around the country. The only aspect I do not like is that funding at each institution only lasts a few years, so successful programs are unable to continue past the term they are allotted. That said, according to the website, GK-12 has benefited over 10,000 STEM graduate students, 11,000 teachers, 5,000 schools, and as many as 600,000 K-12 students.

I am shocked to learn that NSF has decided to cancel the program. According to Science, the decision has been made because graduate student participants do not outperform their peers in research. But as Miriam points out, GK-12 fellows do become better teachers, communicators, and advocates for science education–which was the entire purpose of the program!

So I am calling on every reader to stand up for science! Chris and I care deeply about this issue and it’s the subject of our book, Unscientific America. Please write a letter of support for GK-12 imploring your representatives to restore funding for the program. Everything you need to know is here, including templates and more information about what we may lose.

“What are the best books for my daughter?” “What kinds of extra curricular programs should my son be enrolled in?”

Dear Parents,

You send so many emails asking, “How do I encourage my child to pursue science?”  It’s a noble endeavor, and of course, there’s no end to possible responses. Much depends on what each individual is interested in from marine science to space. While I welcome these inquiries, here’s the best suggestion I can offer: Rather than science specifically,  focus on critical thinking!

No matter how advanced a student’s math skills or laboratory technique, it will be her ability to work through problems and develop creative solutions that sets her apart from peers. In other words, parents should do more than going through the motions for standardized test preparation, and begin early. Foster her natural curiosity about the world. Perhaps most importantly, she needs to believe in herself and recognize what she is capable of.

Sure, it sounds a bit cliche, but that doesn’t mean it’s easy. More than ever before, our culture poses formidable social obstacles to success. Joe’s is right that “It’s okay to be Smart,” but “smart” doesn’t always seem adequate. Kids are bombarded with billboards, music videos, television shows, advertisements, and films telling them that they also have to look and act a certain way to be accepted. A cultural firestorm of unrealistic expectations damages self-esteem and, in turn, academic performance. Of course there’s no simple way to counter these harmful false messages, but building confidence is the place to begin.

So that’s what I hope moms and dads will continue to emphasize. And if you’re still seeking a good book to start with, my vote for elementary schoolers goes to Free To Be You And Me. (DVD and audio are even better!). For young adults, books like Tracy Kidder’s outstanding Mountains Beyond Mountains about Dr. Paul Farmer will help them recognize how one individual can have a tremendous positive impact on the world.

Good luck!

Sheril

In order to tackle conservation, energy, funding, and many more critical issues we discuss, economics will be a large part of the solutions. Yet when we hear economists in the media, I often wonder why women aren’t generally quoted and interviewed. Further, where are the women who blog about it? Answer: They simply don’t exist. UCLA economist Matthew Kahn notes:

There are 52 women who rank in the top 1000 [members of the economics profession] and 0 of them blog.  Contrast that with the men.  Consider the top 100 men. In this elite subset; at least 8 of them blog.  Consider the men ranked between 101 and 200. At least, six of them blog.  So, this isn’t very scientific but we see a 7% participation rate for excellent male economists and a 0% participation rate for excellent women.    This differential looks statistically significant to me.

Kahn is curious about the reasons why and suggests that men may have more leisure time and “nerdy guys spend more time reading and writing blog posts.” Perhaps that’s part of it, but in recent years, the number of women science bloggers has exploded, despite family, teaching, and other obligations. We may not be as well represented when you account for all science blogs (or recognized as often), but our numbers are growing. Women tend to use these forums as tools to share ideas, collaborate, and facilitate discussions beyond the academic bubble where many of us reside. In fact, at ScienceOnline annual meetings, we outnumber our male colleagues. In other words, there must be more to the gender disparity in economics than time and nerdiness. (Although I am, admittedly, a nerd).

Another blogger theorized that women stay away from economics blogs because of their combative style, yet science blogs are not always a particularly friendly place either. (Any regular reader of The Intersection understands what I mean). The pissing contests that emerge do not seem to keep women from blogging. Further, even though comment threads tend to be male dominated, I receive many emails from women and kids, so it’s clear that they’re reading too.

What’s really going on? Here’s my suspicion: Rather than gender differences in attitudes, female economists are simply still not part of the economics blogging culture… yet. It’s not an activity that they consider because there are no predecessors already engaged. In other words, encouraging women to participate is more about changing social mores and cultural norms of what’s acceptable and rewarded within the economics profession. That can’t happen until women are better represented online. A bit of a chicken and egg problem, but I’m confident economics will catch up to science in this regard.

Why does this matter? Because pioneering women will bring new ideas and perspectives to the table. And Kahn is correct that it will also create more opportunities for them to get recognized in their profession. I applaud Kahn for highlighting the gender divide and challenge him and his colleagues to encourage more women to get engaged. If they have reservations, tell them to email me.

Next week I’m headed to West Virginia University to participate in WVU’s Festival of ideas. I’ll be talking about science literacy in the U.S. as they launch their Inaugural Science and Technology Communication Symposium. For those in the area, I begin at 7:30 on April 5 and you can follow along on twitter by using the #WVUFestival hashtag. Details here.

A few days later I’m flying up to Boston for the 10 Year Anniversary of Tisch College. This will be my second trip to speak at Tufts in one month and as a alumna, I’m honored to be part of the “Breakthrough Innovations” portion of the day. For the Jumbos out there, this takes place on April 9 and you can register here.

Over the weekend, I had the privilege of sharing a panel with two science writers I admire tremendously: Carl Zimmer and Deborah Blum. The topic was science blogging, journalism, and the changing media environment. Preparing for our session gave me plenty of time to consider the dynamic nature of the blogosphere and the evolution of online weblogs since my arrival in 2006.

Science blogging itself has virtually exploded during past years. What was once a small community of blogs and bloggers has grown into a myriad of lively networks that interact and engage with each other and broad audiences. We were initially a handful of familiar names and urls, yet now the list is so long that no one—except Bora Zivkovic perhaps—can hope to know every member of the ever-expanding science blogging community. Niches have emerged across disciplines, covering topics from genetics and open access science to, well, everything all at once. And the all-stars do a heck of a good job sharing stories and posing new questions as well.

It’s been extremely interesting to observe the shifting motivations of those who decide to enter the world of science blogging. Years ago, I suspect the majority of us were drawn to this kind of forum as a means of self-expression. A creative outlet. For me, it was cathartic–I had all of these ideas swirling through my head and posting served as a wonderful way to explore them further with readers. I doubt that five years ago, many of us envisioned blogging would be a career asset. At that time, it was still somewhat taboo. Universities didn’t know what to make of blogs and some initially tried to restrict participation by faculty and staff. Meanwhile, we supported each other and the community was close.

Fast forward to 2011 and I’m meeting so many so many fascinating individuals–particularly students, early career scientists, and journalists–who have embraced blogging as a way to stand out, engage others, and get noticed. Many job applicants list blogs near the top of CVs and universities are teaching courses on using new media. Bloggers with authority speak out when they see bad science reporting and a  system of mutual online peer review has emerged. There are exceptions to all of this of course, but I like the overall trends I’m observing: Blogs have become the norm. They are redefining the meaning of “mainstream media” and often determine what makes “news.” Best of all, they are changing perceptions of who scientists are and what we do.

These are my thoughts on the flight home to Austin, and I’m curious to hear readers’ perspectives on the evolution of science blogging. If you are a blogger, when did you begin and what motivated your decision? If you’re a reader, do you enjoy the burgeoning community or feel lost because of information overload? Are your favorite blogs written by scientists, science journalists, or someone in between? The comment thread is yours for discussion, and I’ll be back to participate…