{"id":199,"date":"2008-09-15T09:00:51","date_gmt":"2008-09-15T09:00:51","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/rpg\/2008\/09\/15\/on_science_blogging_2008_part_3\/"},"modified":"2008-09-15T09:00:51","modified_gmt":"2008-09-15T09:00:51","slug":"on_science_blogging_2008_part_3","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/rpg\/2008\/09\/15\/on_science_blogging_2008_part_3\/","title":{"rendered":"On Science Blogging 2008\u2014Part 3"},"content":{"rendered":"

This is the third of three posts detailing my experience of the Science Blogging Conference<\/a> held at the Royal Institution<\/a>, London, on 30th August. You can also read Parts “one”:http:\/\/network.nature.com\/blogs\/user\/rpg\/2008\/09\/11\/on-science-blogging-2008\u2014part-1 and “two”:http:\/\/network.nature.com\/blogs\/user\/rpg\/2008\/09\/12\/on-science-blogging-2008\u2014part-2.
\n——————————<\/p>\n

Challenging assumptions<\/a><\/h3>\n

\nIn the final session of the day, I participated in a ‘wrap-up’ panel. I felt seriously young and under-dressed in my shorts. Li-Kim wanted to hide me behind a table, but I got my revenge.
\n\"LK<\/p>\n

\nFor me, the major theme of the day had been about challenging our assumptions. Science blogging is not a mainstream activity, and is still viewed with suspicion by many more senior scientists and PIs. This seems odd given that we are encouraged to discuss new data at meetings and conferences. There is perhaps a feeling that blogging should not be done on the company dollar; and even that personal time spent blogging should rather be spent in the lab (although no one, for example, seems to care if you play sport during the day<\/em>). <\/p>\n

\nThe example of the University of Sydney<\/a>, which encourages its staff to write blogs, was quite unusual even among the somewhat select audience on the day. It illustrates that authority does not always automatically disapprove of blogging (as members of the first panel discovered). Even so, it is noteworthy that Arts & Humanities blogs at the University vastly outnumber those written by scientists, and that non-science academics do not seem to worry about their reputation being damaged by blogging.<\/p>\n

\nMany people were concerned about whether blogs could be made to count towards CV points or how scientists might get credit for blogging, whether they are ‘citable objects’ and how references to papers from blog entries could be incorporated in impact factors. The idea of primacy (‘first to claim’) versus final publication was discussed, and compared with examples of people being ‘scooped’ from poster sessions at conferences. The main argument against blogs being a citable unit is that they currently lack consensual authority (despite the peer review aspect mentioned in the keynote speech). Blogs are generally seen as discussions<\/em> rather than the syntheses of data or claims that are usually published in journals. <\/p>\n

\nQuestions were asked about objectively judging the quality of blogs, but there are too many problems with counting page hits, comments and incoming links to provide a satisfactory answer.<\/p>\n

\nI think that the thing we should<\/strong> and can<\/strong> challenge people to do is to get senior faculty in their department to keep a weblog. That has a defined outcome and we can set the deadline …<\/em>[1]\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\nFinally, we thought about barriers to the respectability and take-up of (science) blogs. We challenged<\/a> the audience to encourage eminent and\/or senior scientists to start and keep a blog, with the intent of improving acceptance and credibility among the wider scientific community. There were two incentives offered: the chance to be featured in The Open Laboratory<\/a> : The Best Science Writing on Blogs<\/em>), and an expenses-paid trip to Scifoo<\/a> 2009.<\/p>\n

\nThe use of blogs by scientists is still in its infancy. Scientists who blog often suspect that they are not taken seriously by their peers and superiors, although it is not clear to what extent this perception is borne out in reality. There is great potential for the use of blogs in teaching, collaboration and outreach, although issues of credibility and respectability need to be addressed. Blogging and related technology is already very powerful, as evidenced by the ‘meta-discussions’ that took place (and are still underway two weeks later). The main strength of blogging is in the ability to have one’s ideas challenged and refined, to have multi-disciplinary and trans-global conversations through the commenting mechanism.<\/p>\n

\nMany agreed that just as email was initially considered a frivolous pursuit (or just for geeks) that has since become indispensable, blogging will likewise increase in importance and acceptability. Moreover, blogging is being recognized as a tool that is used for several different activities (outreach, teaching, collaboration, self-improvement etc.) rather than merely an end in itself.<\/p>\n

\nOne University stood out in its progressive attitude to blogging. The University of Sydney paid for one of its bloggers to attend the conference in London. This fact drew gasps of amazement from the audience when it was revealed. The University actively encourages blogging. Blogs dot USYD<\/a> is their showcase for their staff blogs and blogs are encouraged to help support research and projects.<\/em> Cite<\/a>\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\n————————
\nAnd that’s all, folks. <\/p>\n

\nPost-conference, many people on Nature Network<\/em> found themselves deluged with ‘xxx has been added to your network’ notifications. That was probably one of the major benefits of the conference; finally being able to meet all these people we’d only read in pixels and shades of grey. New contacts still trickle in, two weeks later. <\/p>\n

\nThis is rather touching. I commented along these lines on the weblog of one of my new contacts, and she replied One of the powers of blogging (or writing, for that matter) is the level of empathy it can raise between oneself and complete strangers… I find it beautiful and scary at once.<\/em> The power of weblogs to bring people together was not really talked about in the formal sessions of the conference, although Anna did touch on in it in the first panel. If I were in the mood I could write about humans as social creatures, and how this is just another iteration of the watering hole\/cave mouth fire\/pub that we seem to be drawn to, more surely than moths to the porch light. But maybe someone more skilled than me would like to think about that.<\/p>\n

\nI have not heard from my Dean yet, but my Head of Department said<\/p>\n

\nIt seems to have been a roaring success. I am intrigued by the notions of blog publication as you go and the minimal publishable unit.<\/em>\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\nSo maybe I’ll see you all,–and more!–next year?<\/p>\n

\n———————–<\/p>\n


\nfn1. From an email sent to Cameron on 1st August 2008<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This is the third of three posts detailing my experience of the Science Blogging Conference held at the Royal Institution, London, on 30th August. You can also read Parts “one”:http:\/\/network.nature.com\/blogs\/user\/rpg\/2008\/09\/11\/on-science-blogging-2008\u2014part-1 and “two”:http:\/\/network.nature.com\/blogs\/user\/rpg\/2008\/09\/12\/on-science-blogging-2008\u2014part-2. —————————— Challenging assumptions In the final session of … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-199","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/rpg\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/199","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/rpg\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/rpg\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/rpg\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/rpg\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=199"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/rpg\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/199\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/rpg\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=199"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/rpg\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=199"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/rpg\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=199"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}