Showing posts with label science journalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label science journalism. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

When men drink ...

... saw this "science-related" article on MSNBC. It supposedly is on the "beer goggle effect".
To make matters even worse, another study shows liquor makes guys more likely to misinterpret a friendly female glance as a bold come-on.
So they spend some time discussing what this all means, and then come up with a "solution".
What to do? Women who want to just have a good time -- and not go home with a guy -- would be smart to dress conservatively, says University of Texas psychology professor Kim Fromme. "That's the more obvious cue."
That's right ladies. When men drink, you need to dress more conservatively. Got to love how the burden shifts from the individuals actually undertaking a behavior and the individuals who are more than likely minding their own damn business.

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Scientists and Journalists

Came across this article in Live Science. Do Scientists and Journalists Get Along?
The new study, from University of Wisconsin-Madison researchers, finds "many mainstream scientists occasionally work with journalists and some do so routinely," according to a statement released by the university today.

The study, compared with previous similar studies, shows that this relationship has been remarkably stable since the 1980s. It is detailed in the current issue of the journal Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. It was done by journalism professor Sharon Dunwoody, life sciences communication professor Dominique Brossard and graduate student Anthony Dudo. The conclusion is based on a survey of 1,200 researchers in the areas of epidemiology and stem cell research (which is to say they did not survey astronomers or paleontologists or sociologists or psychologists, all of whom I argue are among the most enthusiastic and talkative of all scientists).

"By and large, scientists speak to journalists, they know it is important and they're willing to do it again," Dunwoody said. "The frequency with which scientists and journalists interact has been pretty stable over time."
The question though is, is that frequency considered to be enough?