Ecolog

While the "Disseminating scientific thought to the general public: are 
scientists making science readily accessible?" discussion thread contained some 
very useful discussion of principles, nothing illustrates principle like 
specific examples. I would be interested in Ecolog's evaluation of a current 
example of scientific writing, speaking, and media production. Here's an 
interesting example of how the public is being "informed" by a respected 
source: 
http://www.npr.org/2011/04/16/135468901/climate-change-making-the-nations-bears-hungry
 

For those who have time to listen to the item, I'd be interested especially in 
your analysis of the tone of the featured authority. 

WT 


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David L. McNeely" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 5:09 PM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Disseminating scientific thought to the general public: 
are scientists making science readily accessible?


> ---- Martin Meiss <[email protected]> wrote: 
>>   A reasoned argument that when scientists have an important point to make 
>> to the public, they should find a way to do it repeatedly, somewhat like a 
>> television commercial is repeated over and over to get the words out to the 
>> public.  The idea is that a claim made often enough becomes true in the 
>> collective mind, without consideration for whether it is true or not.  
>> Implicit in Martin's recommendation is that the point that scientists have 
>> to make is true, and thus the drum of repetition would not lead to 
>> acceptance of a non-truth.
> 
> If my understanding is correct, then perhaps Martin is correct.  But then 
> again, wouldn't the public begin to think about science as just another one 
> of the myriad of interests groups that bombards it with a barrage of claims, 
> regardless of veracity, but only for the benefit of the group doing the 
> bombardment?
> 
> Methinks the studied, careful delivery of properly vetted information has the 
> greatest chance of doing real, lasting service to truth.  Now, should we deny 
> interest groups (say Union of Concerned Scientists, or American Wildlife 
> Federation) the privilege we deny to ourselves of advertising for welfare?  
> No.
> 
> Nor should we never toot our own horn.  We sometimes should.
> 
> mcneely
> 
> 
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3511 - Release Date: 03/16/11
> Internal Virus Database is out of date.
>

Reply via email to