From Richard P. Grant at Guardian:
How many science communicators do you know who will take the time to listen to their audience? Who are willing to step outside their cosy little bubble and make an effort to reach people where they are, where they are confused and hurting; where they need?
Atul Gawande says scientists should assert “the true facts of good science” and expose the “bad science tactics that are being used to mislead people”. But that’s only part of the story, and is closing the barn door too late.
Because the charlatans have already recognised the need, and have built the communities that people crave. More.
How convenient that the world is divided neatly between “charlatans” and “scientists,” unlike the usual messy situation most people encounter in most situations.
Last time I heard, the Guardian was shedding jobs like trees shed leaves in the fall.
I don’t think anything can save the legacy media business formula but if they would just cut out the snark and condescension – and actually considered the complexity of many issues (which many of us know about by experience) – they might find more time to regroup. The risk is, they would learn something, and maybe they don’t want that.
See also: Peer review unscientific: Tough words from the editor of Nature
Follow UD News at Twitter!