This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American
Here are my Science Seeker Editor's Selections for the past week:
If you want someone to watch your video online, it should probably be less than three minutes long. But academics tend to prefer longer presentations, reaching as long as an hour, so that they can justify each of their claims. At BishopBlog, Dorothy Bishop ponders this apparent mis-match between audience patience and presentation requirements: Communicating science in the age of the internet.
Speaking of science communication, Paul Raeburn, riffing on a Neuroskeptic post, asks, "Why do so many bloggers begin with great enthusiasm only to abandon a few heartfelt posts to the sands of time?" Pouring your heart into posts no one will read.
On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
Over at the Inkfish blog, Elizabeth Preston writes about a new study that offers hope to poor poker players: Brain Scans Predict When Poker Players Will Bluff. Luckily, we probably won't be installing MRI machines in poker rooms any time soon.