Category Archives: science in the media

If It Bleeds, It Leads

Otherwise, Not so Much

Over the past couple of days, millions of people around the world have peaceably come together in person and on the internet to celebrate astronomy. They have been going to star parties in their home towns, viewing objects online through linked telescopes, touring of the world’s observatories, and doing many other activities that people have come out for and enjoyed.

Did you read about this in the press? See anything about it on CNN.com or MSNBC or al-Jazeera, or the Beeb or any of the other “big” online news presences?  I’m guessing not, although there have been stories in local newspapers and, of course, in the blogosphere.  If you relied only on the “mainstream” media, you’d never know that this is the International Year of Astronomy, or that astronomy is one of those sciences that hooks into people’s sense of awe and wonder about the universe. It’s a GOOD thing, but it doesn’t bleed. So, it doesn’t lead. Or if it does lead, it’s because some editor somewhere thought it was time for a “weird” story.

It appears that the “mainstream” media has pretty much abdicated any kind of serious science reporting these days, leaving it for — well, I dunno, people like me, to cover science or science-related stories. What passes for “science’ media these days is a kind of techy-business-driven commentary about the latest apps for iPhones or some new medical finding.  Occasionally you see stories about Antarctica melting or a new picture from HST, but that’s pretty much it. There’s very little concerted reporting (on a daily basis) about science for its own sake. And, heaven forfend anybody write about the interest that millions of people have in astronomy on a weekend when an official, world-wide event ABOUT astronomy is taking place. “What?” I can hear a bunch of editors asking, “Spend news time on a bunch of geeks?  Are they nekkid?  Protesting?  what’s that you say? They’re looking through telescopes and having a great time and sharing what they see with other people around the world?  No news there.. .who cares?”

This means that YOU as a taxpayer, an interested person, an armchair scientist of some kind, lose out on a very fascinating part of what other people are doing to understand our world.

So, what exactly is the news media focusing on?  Not science. Not even close.

Let’s take a look at a typical example — CNN.com.  I went over and perused their front page today.  Aside from the necessary headlines of the day (the New York state murders, the North Korean rocket launch), some stories there have been there for several days running. Do we really need three days of incessant analysis of Michelle Obama’s J. Crew sweater?  Do we need to see the same losing politicians and think-tankers bloviating about banking policy?  How many times can we read the story about the teenager who made a duct-tape prom dress?

I clicked on the Science/Tech link and got a story about biodegradable chewing gum that’s been up for a few days; another one about the return of the right whale (yay), more stories about Mt. Redoubt, and NOTHING about millions of people celebrating 100 Hours of Astronomy.  If millions of people had, say, decided to not pay their taxes or march on a country’s capital (or better yet, from a newsmedia standpoint, get in a riot and spill some blood), then THAT would be news.

But somehow, the idea that that many people could get together and enjoy science just doesn’t resonate with the media.  So, I kind of wonder — and mind you, I’m a trained journalist and have a science research background — just exactly what good is the “mainstream” media if it’s not covering stuff that millions of people do?  If it’s not even giving a perfunctory note about something as wonderful as a world full of people celebrating astronomy?  Science is part of our lives, but you wouldn’t know it from the lack of coverage of something as cool as ordinary people joining with each other to look at the sky and learn.

New Books on the Shelf

Ooh Boy!!

My messy bookshelf (one of many)

Courtesy of Cambridge University Press (who published a book that Jack Brandt and I wrote called “Visions of the Cosmos“) I got a nice box of books in the mail last week. The first one is Evolution, edited together by Frederick Burkhardt, Samantha Evans, and Alison Pearn, with a forward by Sir David Attenborough, and contains selected letters of Charles Darwin.  I look forward to reading Darwin’s thoughts as he traveled. It’s important to understand the thought process of the man whose work began our search to figure out how and why species on Earth have evolved over time.

The next one I got was An Introduction to Space Weather. I’ve been working with MIT’s Haystack Observatory on a series of videos about space weather, and it’s always nice to have another reference book on hand. I’ll probably take this one on a plane trip to read (yes, I’m that whack).

The third book I ordered is a nice update of an old favorite, the Cambridge Illustrated Dictionary of Astronomy. My older copy (signed by the author herself) is well-thumbed and much-used. I browsed through this new edition and it looks wonderful! Will I sit and read it? Yes, probably so. After all, I’m the kid who once spent a summer reading the encyclopedia in our family library!