Is it just me, or does anyone else think scientific achievements should be in the media more often?

I definitely think more attention should be paid to science in the media; especially since it is undervalued and so often under attack these days. Good idea!

I read the science section in the newspaper. I am not sure that an awards show is a good idea, but more coverage would be welcome.

The BBC in the UK produces some good science programmes such as Material World on the radio and Horizon on television. I am not sure about an awards programme but I do think science should be better covered by the media.

Naturally, I’m all for this. :)

There are places in the media to get good stuff. I love Radiolab, and the Well blog in the NYT. There are tons of other blogs (not associated with major media outlets) that regularly post on new and exciting things in science (e.g., Pharyngula, Skepchick, and Isis the scientist).

Unfortunately I think science and the media tend not to mix well. Scientists are often frustrated by the popular media misrepresenting their work (this sums it up pretty well), and non-scientists seem to get annoyed at scientists contradicting themselves all the time.

Last week a coworker and I were interviewed by our school’s press office, and it was a frustrating experience in both directions. We were trying to carefully and accurately explain exactly what we did and what we found, and the reporter was not interested in any of this and was just trying to find her story. Which is understandable, since that’s her job.

I’m of two minds about this. Given the writing skillz of most journalists and the attention span of the viewing / reading public, I don’t think the stories / discoveries would be accurately reported on (but that would probably be offset by how few people would read them through to the end, anyway, or understand exactly what was written, whether it was correct and correct or not). On the other hand, I think there is a lot of good and accurate reporting out there for anyone who cares to read it, even in popular print media such as Science Digest, Popular Science, Discover magazine and others, and TED.com.

One thing that could very much be played up in the media is stories of how small businesses work, and how some large businesses are not ripping you off. Such as the news I read today in a tiny story that the owners of the Green Bay Packers are updating and adding seating to Lambeau Stadium – at team expense only, with no public money involved. We need more of those stories.

They’d only be misunderstood more often.

There are many venues with information of scientific achievements. The daily news reports are geared to making money, so it no one cares to watch the reports, they won’t be included.

Let’s see… a new discovery in nanotechnology or another discussion of Kim Kardashian’s wedding… how to choose, how to choose… NANOTECHNOLOGY, please!

But seriously, I’d rather hear more clear and accurate stories about what’s happening in various areas of science. I might not understand it all, but I know enough smart people who I can ask!

If science gets into the media, it has to get into the right media. If science gets reported by the same sort of media that most people today know as media, it might hurt science more than it benifits science. We need an organization that accurately and completely reports science for the masses.

Great idea.

Absolutely they should be in the media more. Do you suppose that it has anything to do with the scientific surprises confirming Biblical truth more than dissing it as in, say the 80’s? For instance the Big Bang Theory sure seems to align with “God Said” ..........