gonna be a busy couple of weeks so posting will be light. Again. just a couple of quick things.
First, the latest iteration of old-school vs. blogosphere happened in, of all places, a chemistry journal. Just the same old arguments - bloggers can't be trusted etc - from another obsolescent form of publishing. I was going to write the obligatory I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I post but the science bloggers did it better, so you should read this from David Kroll and this from Deborah Blum if you care to get the smart reaction.
I also noticed Maureen Dowd recently lamented the rebirth of anti-intellectualism on the right wing. I'm not going to do the "it happens as much on the left" thing because honestly, it doesn't.
My take on it is simple - we've allowed our politics to descend to new depths of stupid. We're poised to elect people who essentially believe dinosaurs and people lived together on this earth and belching a gazillion tons of smoke into the air really doesn't do anything bad, and it's totally OK to ignore challenging questions from reporters or even citizens, and it's even ok to hide where you get your money to broadcast your made-up crap.
We've allowed it to happen because no one with real power on the left (or even in the middle) has actually done anything to make it stop.
It's especially harmful to people in my line of work because most people see politics and PR as largely the same thing these days. PR is actually about getting to the truth. It's about telling people what's important. Sadly our politicians (and too many PR folks) think PR is about changing the subject or hiding what matters most.
If you do this right - or if you really want to do this right - you think Campaign 2010 is inherently bad for business.
20 October 2010
15 October 2010
Blog Action Day
And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky." So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.(Genesis 1:20-21)
It is He Who sends down water from the sky, and with it We bring forth vegetation of all kinds, and out of it We bring forth green stalks, from which We bring forth thick clustered grain. And out of the date-palm and its spathe come forth clusters... (Quran 6:99)
For men hath he created earth and waters,
and ever helped the prayer of him who worships.
(Rig Veda hymn)
“Nothing in the world is more flexible and yielding than water. Yet when it attacks the firm and the strong, none can withstand it, because they have no way to change it. So the flexible overcome the adamant, the yielding overcome the forceful. Everyone knows this, but no one can do it.” (Lao Tzu)
I'm pleased that the folks at Blog Action Day chose this topic. Water has been so central to our existence, so ingrained in every culture, that it's easy to overlook. It's been said you never miss the water until the well runs dry. Will we wait that long?
05 October 2010
Bonnie Tyler's Words Live On
 |
| OK, so, I like big hair |
Today she's singing about the need for a hero to scientists - because it's not just science funding that's under attack. Virginia's Attorney General is at it again:
I'll readily acknowledge that when Cuccinelli did this the first time I thought it was nothing more than a stunt by a political opportunist in the wake of this faux scandal. After all, his subpoenas were obviously sloppily crafted and they were quickly shot down by a judge. But now it's apparent he wants to press this issue. He's trying to intimidate researchers and he's essentially adding a page to the climate change denial playbook - if you can't win an argument on the merits, make stuff up and use taxpayer resources to sue.
It's clear that AG Cuccinelli, drawing on his vast experience of exactly zero days as a climate change researcher, now believes he can tell what's good research and what's not:
But Cuccinelli gets away with it for one simple reason: there is no organized opposition. No one stands up for science in our public discourse or in our policy debates when standing up for science gets the least bit uncomfortable or expensive. When a researcher's conclusions start to rub someone the wrong way, someone just makes stuff up about the researcher, turns him into a villain, and suffers absolutely no consequences for their lies. Scientists have no allies who will come to their defense, because scientists have done remarkably little to build relationships with influential people beyond their own, cloistered communities. (It's called "ivory tower" for a reason, people.)
And no, I don't consider the occasional rant from a science blogger, with or without f-bombs, to be "consequences." (Though I quickly searched the science blogosphere for reactions to this and I didn't even find this.) Bottom line: there is no real, organized, diverse opposition that encourages people to take action and demonstrate a real down side to attacking science and scientists.
I'm sure someone at the University of Virginia will say something along the lines of "attacking scientists is bad." I'm guessing the words "chilling effect" and "academic freedom" will be used. And I'm guessing that will be the extent of opposition. Because, you know, it's uncomfortable to get into discussions like this.
There are political constituencies in this country that Cuccinelli would not dare attack. Many of those constituencies have much less money than you may think. But they're organized. They have leaders. They have people who mobilize. And they're not afraid to mix it up.
Not so for scientists. And as long as this continues, scientists will continue to be "picked off," a handful at a time.
I'm probably not going to make too many friends for saying this - but it's the truth. Scientists don't seem to have much trouble mocking their critics from behind their keyboards or using heated language when talking about science itself. But I really don't see much when it comes to speaking truth to power. I really don't see much when it comes to building a movement that would make people like Cuccinelli think twice before pulling a stunt like this. Going on the attack is uncomfortable. Executing a well-planned and coordinated attack is time-consuming on top of uncomfortable. People would rather advocate or do something polite or "positive."
But it's long past time for scientists to go on the attack. It's long past time for someone among their ranks to emerge as a leader. It's long past time for scientists to organize.
Who's going to step up?
Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli has sent a new civil subpoena to the University of Virginia, renewing a demand for documents related to a work of a former university climate scientist that was stymied when a judge blocked his previous request in August.For those of you just joining us, Cuccinelli's target is Michael Mann, a researcher who worked at the University of Virginia until 2005. To be quite general, I think Mann's research said something along the lines of "climate change is happening quickly." Then someone stole some of his emails and alleged he and other scientists were faking their data or something like that, creating the farce the media sometimes called "climate-gate." Mann has since been exonerated from the allegations, though to the best of my knowledge no one has ever caught the person or people who hacked into those computers and stole and published those private emails.
I'll readily acknowledge that when Cuccinelli did this the first time I thought it was nothing more than a stunt by a political opportunist in the wake of this faux scandal. After all, his subpoenas were obviously sloppily crafted and they were quickly shot down by a judge. But now it's apparent he wants to press this issue. He's trying to intimidate researchers and he's essentially adding a page to the climate change denial playbook - if you can't win an argument on the merits, make stuff up and use taxpayer resources to sue.
It's clear that AG Cuccinelli, drawing on his vast experience of exactly zero days as a climate change researcher, now believes he can tell what's good research and what's not:
"Specifically, but without limitation, some of the conclusions of the papers demonstrate a complete lack of rigor regarding the statistical analysis of the alleged data, meaning that the result reported lacked statistical significance without a specific statement to that effect," the CID alleges.Of course this isn't the first time that climate science has come under attack from a politician. There are plenty of scientists who are quite used to this sort of thing in a variety of fields - evolution, reproductive research, even vaccines. But this clear abuse of power strikes me as particularly egregious - the specific allegations have already been shown to be without merit, and the AG is simply on the wrong side of the science. If I were a Virginia taxpayer, I'd want a refund.
But Cuccinelli gets away with it for one simple reason: there is no organized opposition. No one stands up for science in our public discourse or in our policy debates when standing up for science gets the least bit uncomfortable or expensive. When a researcher's conclusions start to rub someone the wrong way, someone just makes stuff up about the researcher, turns him into a villain, and suffers absolutely no consequences for their lies. Scientists have no allies who will come to their defense, because scientists have done remarkably little to build relationships with influential people beyond their own, cloistered communities. (It's called "ivory tower" for a reason, people.)
And no, I don't consider the occasional rant from a science blogger, with or without f-bombs, to be "consequences." (Though I quickly searched the science blogosphere for reactions to this and I didn't even find this.) Bottom line: there is no real, organized, diverse opposition that encourages people to take action and demonstrate a real down side to attacking science and scientists.
I'm sure someone at the University of Virginia will say something along the lines of "attacking scientists is bad." I'm guessing the words "chilling effect" and "academic freedom" will be used. And I'm guessing that will be the extent of opposition. Because, you know, it's uncomfortable to get into discussions like this.
There are political constituencies in this country that Cuccinelli would not dare attack. Many of those constituencies have much less money than you may think. But they're organized. They have leaders. They have people who mobilize. And they're not afraid to mix it up.
Not so for scientists. And as long as this continues, scientists will continue to be "picked off," a handful at a time.
I'm probably not going to make too many friends for saying this - but it's the truth. Scientists don't seem to have much trouble mocking their critics from behind their keyboards or using heated language when talking about science itself. But I really don't see much when it comes to speaking truth to power. I really don't see much when it comes to building a movement that would make people like Cuccinelli think twice before pulling a stunt like this. Going on the attack is uncomfortable. Executing a well-planned and coordinated attack is time-consuming on top of uncomfortable. People would rather advocate or do something polite or "positive."
But it's long past time for scientists to go on the attack. It's long past time for someone among their ranks to emerge as a leader. It's long past time for scientists to organize.
Who's going to step up?
01 October 2010
Congratulations are in order
Nice to see good people find success:
Susan Getgood is now VP, Sales & Marketing at BlogHer. The best name in social media now has one of the best jobs in social media as well. A great fit for her.
Liz Gumbinner, Kristen Chase, and Beth Blecherman have officially launched Cool Mom Tech. The right people working on the right stuff for the right community at the right time. I expect huge success for this project.
Science For Citizens, the company run by Darlene Cavalier and Michael Gold, graduated from the Good Company Ventures business incubator and won "Best Pitch" at their graduation event. They have some amazing plans in the works and they're going to accomplish a lot.
Bora Zivkovic is joining Scientific American to be their online community manager. Keep your eye on this science blog network - my sources tell me the priority will be "fun."
Susan Getgood is now VP, Sales & Marketing at BlogHer. The best name in social media now has one of the best jobs in social media as well. A great fit for her.
Liz Gumbinner, Kristen Chase, and Beth Blecherman have officially launched Cool Mom Tech. The right people working on the right stuff for the right community at the right time. I expect huge success for this project.
Science For Citizens, the company run by Darlene Cavalier and Michael Gold, graduated from the Good Company Ventures business incubator and won "Best Pitch" at their graduation event. They have some amazing plans in the works and they're going to accomplish a lot.
Bora Zivkovic is joining Scientific American to be their online community manager. Keep your eye on this science blog network - my sources tell me the priority will be "fun."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)