Labs: Build Your Own Science Blog Network. No, really, build your own science blog network. The merits of being on a network are many (community, traffic, search ranking, etc.), but the one that matters the most is the prestige a blogger gains by association with the other bloggers in the network and through being part of a professional organization. The reason for this is straightforward--the first impressions a blogger makes are largely built on split-second judgments, and among the things that can be judged the quickest are appearances and the company you keep. If you're part of a professional looking network that includes another blogger who a reader already judges favorably, you're ahead of the game even before the reader reads word one.
That doesn't mean you don't need to still be a good/great blogger to have an impact, you do, but being part of a network is a foot in the door every single day of the year. The benefits of being on a network are not in dispute. Edit: 08/12/10 - Class cancelled due to lack of enrollment. Angry weighs in on the Sb Debacle. The blue revolution at BBC Science | Martin Robbins | Science. It's funny how things can be connected. I was looking up the recipe for Worcestershire sauce last night and ended up idly clicking through Wikipedia.
It turns out that the sauce is made from anchovies, which can cause amnesic shellfish poisoning, a brain-damaging illness that may have caused thousands of frantic seabirds to invade towns in Californian in 1961; events that may have provided some inspiration for Hitchcock's film The Birds. I found all this because of links. Links are the foundation of the world wide web. They take us beyond whatever we happened to be looking for, on journeys to places we never even imagined existed. Every minute of every day, millions of curious apes click billions of links, each travelling on their own miniature voyages of discovery. Of all the differences between science blogging and mainstream media reporting of science, one of the most profound is the use of links. And links can do much more than that. But now the Beeb seems to have relented. In Defense of Links, Part One: Nick Carr, hypertext and delinkification.
If you would like to remedy impotence you do not need medicines, you can obtain a difficult hard-on by taking the enclosed herbal remedies and not only do they get you a tougher hard-on, these herbal remedies will do some thing which drugs simply can’t do and that’s increase your libido in the exact same time – lets consider a look at how they work. Herbs on the other hand, increase your libido so you benefit from the total sexual encounter.
Many males get frustrated when they consider drugs because there’s no increase in sexual intercourse drive plus they need manual stimulation from the penis to get hard. Nitric oxide performs the vital function of opening up the blood vessels which lead to the penis, so they are wide enough to take the increased amount of blood in, to stiffen the penis. If you want to obtain an erection, you need to boost your amounts of nitric oxide. Psychological impotence is nearly guaranteed to impact males a minimum of once in their existence. Accidental Hedonist - The Unfortunate Truths of Food Blogging. Dissemination and Science On-line #solo10. Science On Line I am with about 150 people interested in “science communication on-line” at the British Library in London this week.
Journals are all about the communication of science results, and the not-for-profit charity that owns us, The Annals of Botany Company, is dedicated to the dissemination of botanical knowledge. So it is critical that we are at the front of seeing how the web is changing the way we conduct, communicate, share and evaluate science – we need to see how the new mechanisms can be used in the very best way. Nevertheless, I think I am one of the only Chief Editors here, and the Annals team is strongly represented by Managing Editor David Frost, and both Alun Salt (@alun) and Alan Cann (@ajcann) who are leading our implementation of new approaches such as this blog, and Richard O’Beirne from our publishers, Oxford University Press.
Some of the community here are groups I have never met before, and using internet tools in enitrely new ways. Jay Rosen in Paris, J-Schools in America, and a Global Struggle for the Next Press « News Launch Diary. Wiki life « BuzzMachine. “Everyone brings their crumbs of knowledge to the task and if they don’t, we’re the lesser for it.” I love that line about encouraging more people to bring more knowledge to Wikipedia, from a conversation yesterday with Sue Gardner, executive director of the Wikimedia Foundation. Gardner had just presented the results of a gargantuan, one-year-long strategy project made with about 1k Wikipedians in a few dozen languages producing 26k pages and a lot of good ideas, including expert review of articles; offline, distributed use of Wikipedia; and the wiki-based university, where research and knowledge aren’t lost. Gardner says they started the project with the knowledge that there would be “a high likelihood of failure.”
It was possible, though unlikely, that no one would have come to the party. It was more likely, I’d say, that it would be taken over by fringe interests and nutty ideas. Wikimedia then has to understand the motives of people who will help in either kind of task. Matthew Yglesias » If a Working Paper Falls in the Wilderness and a Journalist Hears About It, Is that Worse? By Matthew Yglesias Posted on "If a Working Paper Falls in the Wilderness and a Journalist Hears About It, Is that Worse? " I appeared on a panel at the American Political Science Association annual meeting yesterday about journalism and political science and one thing that struck me (apart from the relative rarity of this kind of sneering condescension) was that political scientists’ description of the incentive structure of their own profession was kind of bizarre.
As I heard it explained to me, it’s not merely that taking time to help inform a non-specialist audience about political science findings isn’t specifically rewarded, it’s positively punished. And not simply in the sense that doing less research and more publicizing is punished; I was told that holding research output constant, getting more publicity for your output would be harmful to a junior scholar’s career because it would feed an assumption of non-seriousness. That’s pretty nuts.