khcg0492@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Kenneth Holden Chang) (05/29/91)
This summer I'm taking leave of my regular persona of physics graduate student to be a science writer for the San Francisco Chronicle. I'd like some help from net people about possible article ideas as well as general comments about the state of science journalism. More specifically: 1) Do you know of neato-keen areas of research that haven't been reported widely? If so, please a) tell me what it is, b) tell me who to talk with and and c) tell me the relevant journal articles. 2) If they let me, I want to do a science column about simple things that 99% of the people on this planet never think about, such as how do you convince yourself that the Earth is indeed round and that it's not actually one big practical joke? Any ideas for such columns gratefully welcomed. 3) What do you think about the media's coverage of science? Most people I know regard as pretty mediocre (I've generally heard favorable things about only Science News and Scientific American.) Science people complain journalists don't really understand what's going on and report something only if it is a "possible cure for cancer" or promises "to revolutionize our lives." I'd appreciate it if people could cite examples of good and bad science journalism. (Citations are sufficient; you don't have to send me the article.) Please reply through e-mail. If you do post, be sure to edit the header down to the relevant groups. (Sorry about the mass crossposting, but I did want to cover all of the fields.) And thank you for your help. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Kenneth Chang ~ khcg0492@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu Center for Complex Systems Research ~ or University of Illinois ~ kc@complex.ccsr.uiuc.edu ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A.S.Chamove@massey.ac.nz (A.S. Chamove) (05/30/91)
Suggest you read New Scientist from the UK as an example of good scientific journalism. I regularly do a project in my Animal Behaviour classes formerly in the UK and now here in NZ where I show them animal behaviour videos make in various parts of the world. Those made in the UK are always ranked first and those from the USA rank poorest. THe reasons seem to be (for Brits and Kiwis that is--I have never done it in the USA) that the former stick to science where as the others try to evaluate animal behaviour and to put human feelings into the animals' performance. Maybe Americans need that "translation" or need that emotional tug, but I doubt it. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Arnold Chamove Massey University Psychology Palmerston North, New Zealand
rwmurphr@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu (Robert W Murphree) (05/31/91)
khcg0492@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Kenneth Holden Chang) writes: >This summer I'm taking leave of my regular persona of physics graduate >student to be a science writer for the San Francisco Chronicle. I'd like >some help from net people about possible article ideas as well as general >comments about the state of science journalism. More specifically: >1) Do you know of neato-keen areas of research that haven't been >reported widely? If so, please a) tell me what it is, b) tell me who >to talk with and and c) tell me the relevant journal articles. >2) If they let me, I want to do a science column about simple things >that 99% of the people on this planet never think about, such as >how do you convince yourself that the Earth is indeed round and that >it's not actually one big practical joke? Any ideas for such columns >gratefully welcomed. >3) What do you think about the media's coverage of science? Most >people I know regard as pretty mediocre (I've generally heard >favorable things about only Science News and Scientific American.) >Science people complain journalists don't really understand what's going >on and report something only if it is a "possible cure for cancer" or >promises "to revolutionize our lives." I'd appreciate it if people >could cite examples of good and bad science journalism. (Citations >are sufficient; you don't have to send me the article.) >Please reply through e-mail. If you do post, be sure to edit the >header down to the relevant groups. (Sorry about the mass crossposting, >but I did want to cover all of the fields.) >And thank you for your help. In reading through your last entry, I came up with the perfect idea for an interesting subject for you to cover. As an experiment in physics and specifically momentum, line people up in a line each approximately 150 lbs each -three feet apart in a line 2000 feet long. Find an automobile weighing 2000 pounds and bring it up to 60 miles per hours and when you strike the first person in line take your foot off the gas. Figure your stopping distance and be sure to take into account the fact that someone may get caught in your wheel well and figure in the friction caused. good luck! My friend robert posted this for me. I am totally responsible for posting this. signed Mark McMillan, junior
rwmurphr@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu (Robert W Murphree) (05/31/91)
An interesting topic is the origin of complexity. John d. Barrow the physicist said in a New scientist article that although we know the laws of the universe have various beautiful simplicities and symettries-and we know about symmetry breaking-the pencil standing on end representing the symmetry before the big bang. We are just beginning to understand how complexity comes out of these symmmetries-the I. prigonine irreversible thermodynamics stuff is part of this . I think this is fascinating stuff and is not well known. I think it would be interesting to see if a science writer-not necessariy a newspaper science writer-could tackle such a subject. Send me a copy if you get interested in this subject. :r /uokmax/group4/rwmurphr/me
mcdonald@newsserver.sfu.ca (Kenneth McDonald) (05/31/91)
Perhaps I may get flamed for this but... I think an extremely good series on science would focus on the downside. For example, PBS over the last several weeks has been showing a series called, "The Astronomers," all about the joy and romance of astronomy. However, they don't happen to mention a few of the things that have recently been mentioned in soc.college.grad, for example that the average astronomy Ph.D. must now do an average of over 2 postdocs before landing a job, and that this requirement is still going up. The popular press has adopted the scientific establishment as a fount of wisdom and fulfillment for all involved, which is hardly the case--it might be interesting to see some stories done about some of the problems. Ken McDonald mcdonald@cs.sfu.ca P.S. a notable exception to the above mentioned trend in the press was a relatively recent article in Newsweek (Time?--they all look alike to me), about the overproduction of scientist--yes, overproduction, not under-. A refreshing point of view. .
rizzo@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (anthony.r.rizzo) (05/31/91)
In article <1991May29.054220.4963@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> khcg0492@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Kenneth Holden Chang) writes: >This summer I'm taking leave of my regular persona of physics graduate >student to be a science writer for the San Francisco Chronicle. I'd like >some help from net people about possible article ideas as well as general >comments about the state of science journalism. More specifically: > > [ much stuff deleted...] I have a suggestion for at least one article regarding a serious problem that has a direct impact on society and the economy. It seems that a significant number of American corporations are putting large-scale finite element analysis (FEA) programs in the hands of inexperienced engineers and non-engineers. The managers in those corporations think that such programs are now so easy to use that mechanical engineering analyses can be treated as a push-button activity. At a recent conference for users of one such program, last week, I asked an audience of several hundred attendees to raise their hands if they felt that FEA programs were being misused within their corporations regularly. To my inordinate surprise, nearly half the audience raised their hands. The implication of such misuse is that American corporations are designing products on the basis of worthless analyses, done by incompetents. Unfortunately, all involved, including managers and so-called analysts, believe the beautiful color graphics that the programs generate. You will be in an ideal position to bring this problem to light. I hope that you do so. Some day we and our families may fly in an airplane or ride in a car that was "analyzed" in this manner. Just the thought of that scares me to death. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= * Anthony R. Rizzo * * The FEA Group * * AT&T Bell Laboratories * * att.com!homxc!rizzo (201) 386-2565 * * Knowing that you have a good answer is everything! * =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) (05/31/91)
In article <1991May31.004212.18479@cbfsb.att.com> rizzo@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (anthony.r.rizzo) writes: >The implication of such misuse is that American corporations >are designing products on the basis of worthless analyses, >done by incompetents. Unfortunately, all involved, including Hey don't get so upset. This is only mathematics. For years, corporations have been doing the same quality of analysis in more serious areas such as economics and finance. -- =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*= Neil W. Rickert, Computer Science <rickert@cs.niu.edu> Northern Illinois Univ. DeKalb, IL 60115 +1-815-753-6940