Why scientists should blog
Seed magazine has a really fascinating article on Saturn’s moons. It’s a cool read and you should check it out if you’re as amazed by space as I am. I want to talk about a different part of the article.
Seed links to the blog of one of the authors of the paper under discussion, where he talks about some of the academic drama that went on behind the scenes. I’m hardly the first to point out that scientists are taking a much more active role in communicating with the general population, but I’m curious what the humanization of scientists through interactions with social media will do.
Humans make mistakes, and a lot of scientific research is wrong. Sometimes it’s wrong only in little ways, and it takes a really careful eye to pick out research mistakes that matter and those that don’t. It’s worrisome that people who wish to oppose the conclusions of new research will be able to point to blog posts by (at least seemingly) reputable people pointing out small mistakes and implying that the whole conclusion is forfeit.
I think this happens a lot when ordinary people try to read legal documents. Every once in a while reddit will happen across the text of some law that seems really extreme but in practice is applied reasonably. This was especially true pre-Obama for obvious reasons.
The internet gives us access to original research but doesn’t necessarily give us the tools for understanding it and more importantly for evaluating it. That’s why science blogs are so essential. Strong authorities that can act as a guide to a subject are going to be extremely valuable to society getting important facts right.
