About the SA Blog Network

Guest Blog

Guest Blog

Commentary invited by editors of Scientific American
Guest Blog HomeAboutContact

Conversations about Science: The Role of Blogs and Social Media

The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily those of Scientific American.

Email   PrintPrint



Writing about science for the last eight years has changed dramatically for me with the advent of blogging and social media. In fact, at many science conferences blogging is what we are asked to do by our editors throughout the five or six days of the event that we attend. These are not personal blog posts, but posts on blogs which are officially part of the publication. We are expected to write in a more relaxed style for the blog and look for stories which are lighter than what we usually report on in science.

So, when I covered ESOF2010 (Euroscience Open Forum) in Turin, I blogged for Scidevnet and the posts were all on light topics like ‘Motorbikes fuel savers or killers on the road?’ Or about how ‘Science attracts or repels

That is why I was keen to attend a session at ESOF2012 in Dublin, about the role of social media in science. The session connected with me instantly and I was keen on knowing how other science journalists use blogs and social media, too.

According to the panel of speakers, science blogging has become a significant part of professional and public communication about science in certain sectors. An example given was of Biochemistry, where new developments were discussed and bloggers forced a retraction of the claim that certain bacteria live off arsenic. In fact, most scientific institutions today maintain blogs written by professional bloggers, attached to their websites. These blogs contain postings on conferences, work-shops and additional information on already published findings.

During the session, Bora Zivkovic the Blogs Editor at the Scientific American [thus the editor of this very blog], revealed that one of his personal highlights of becoming a blogger was when he translated his own ‘heavy’ and detailed scientific articles and turned them into blog posts, softening them for the regular reader. In one case, he was contacted by a researcher from Cornell University about one of his posts, which subsequently led to a collaboration and a publication of a new paper. “Today I can publish papers without getting out of my pyjamas,” he said, “and I have been the first blogger ever to have a blog post cited in a paper. There are official ways of citing a blog, just like you cite a published paper,” he said.

Dublin onvention centre

Blogs open interesting avenues for discussions between other scientists, students, thinkers and the public. Blogs are open to immediate responses, where people can comment on a writer’s piece. This is what most writers look for – constructive criticism of their work. In the regular print medium, most often, we science journalists never get any responses to our published work, as the letters to the editor focus mainly on responses to political stories or front page news.

Ulrike Brandt-Bohne, a biologist and science journalist from Germany said that, “Blogs help Science meet Society and you can showcase your work by writing a blog. While Felix Bohne, a virologist and immunologist, who was another speaker on the panel said a lot of people suffered from HIV denialism and he blamed it on pseudo science. “A lot of people think vaccines are bad and there is no way of stopping the negative hype in their minds.” However with blogs, he has found posting on topics to do with viruses has helped increase credibility and allay the fears one has to conquer with regard to vaccines. Ulrike said people still held measles parties in the hope that they get infected together. They are not uneducated people and sadly believe what they are doing is right. “I will go on blogging,” says Ulrike, “in the hope of educating them.”

It was interesting to hear Martin Robbins, a science journalist from the Guardian, UK say, “ I am fed up with mainstream coverage of certain topics, so blogs are a great way to get the message out. There needs to be an attitude change in mainstream media with regard to blogging.” He went on to say that Science communication and Science Journalism were quite different from one another. Science journalism needed to challenge findings and put them into context, rather than just be the voice piece of the scientist. He also said that authors of blogs should act as moderators and in discussions one can get both nasty and brilliant reponses to a debate. “That is why a blog helps to engage with the public and fire their curiosity”, he said. Blogging also is social communication, where a bunch of like minded people participate in a discussion which can be very fulfilling.

Blogging has caught on in a big way in India as well and all mainstream publications sport blogs which have ‘professional bloggers’ loading information on them every day. In fact, when we science journalists cover a conference, we blog on a daily basis, and then subsequently write the longer stories with a lot more work and time put into the effort, once we reach our home countries.

Marianne de Nazareth About the Author: Marianne de Nazareth is a senior journalist and till recently handled the Edit and Op-Ed pages of the Deccan Herald newspaper in Bangalore, India. Today she freelances for a host of publications including the Hindu, The Deccan Chronicle, Deccan Herald, several magazines including Discover India and India Immemorial, Planet Earth, Energy Next, International Indian, Inflight magazines and of late several online portals like islamonline,,,,, Alerttnet, Down to earth,, among others. From 2006 to 2008 she did a Masters in journalism (Erasmus Mundus Masters in Journalism) and is presently a PhD scholar with the University of Madurai. She is a media fellow with the UNFCCC, UNEP and Robert Bosch Stiftung, ITF and ICIMOD and she teaches budding journalists a Masters course in St. Joseph’s College Mass Communications Dept. as adjunct faculty.

The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily those of Scientific American.

Comments 5 Comments

Add Comment
  1. 1. KallenDK 5:14 pm 08/3/2012

    I agree with this post. The strength of blogging lies in the ability to write with relaxed prose. It brings science to people outside of the field.

    Link to this
  2. 2. Quentin 6:10 am 08/4/2012

    I run a cross-discipline blog under the aegis of the Catholic Herald (a national newspaper based in London). It looks at the relationship between the two magisteria of science and faith. It started in the Year or Darwin to help people to understand the different “rules” under which these two operate, and how they do not conflict with each other.

    Secondsightblogdotnet attracts a large number of contributions which fill out and debate the weekly posts. And, judging by its popularity, it is filling a strong need for those who are concerned about what they might otherwise see as a threat to their beliefs. This, I suggest, is a valuable contribution to understanding how religion need not be the enemy of science, nor science of religion. It would be strengthened however by more contributions from agnostics or atheist scientists – and save me from having to present objections and difficulties on their behalf.

    Link to this
  3. 3. G. Karst 11:18 am 08/4/2012

    I think an important example of blogs scientific future is illustrated by Anthony Watts, posting of his paper:

    An area and distance weighted analysis of the impacts of station exposure on the U.S. Historical Climatology Network temperatures and temperature trends, is co-authored by Anthony Watts of California, Evan Jones of New York, Stephen McIntyre of Toronto, Canada, and Dr. John R. Christy from the Department of Atmospheric Science, University of Alabama, Huntsville, is to be submitted for publication.

    Review by bloggers pointed out a number of pre-publishing errors and problems that will now be corrected, making the paper much stonger. This open review aids science significantly. GK

    Link to this
  4. 4. Bora Zivkovic 8:52 pm 08/4/2012

    Watts? Really? As an example of *science* blogging? No, he is good at pretending, but is really anti-science.

    Link to this
  5. 5. G. Karst 10:39 am 08/5/2012

    Bora Zivkovic – that is hardly the point. It demonstrates the advantages and desirability of open review. Forget the man and the specific paper and consider the concept of open review. Now consider the present system of closed pal review, and all the junk science which clears the bar. GK

    Link to this

Add a Comment
You must sign in or register as a member to submit a comment.

More from Scientific American

Email this Article