Abstract
This chapter traces the short history of science blogs, with particular reference to blogs published by scientists. It situates the slow growth of scientists’ blogs in the contexts of the wider, emerging blogosphere and of the proliferation of science media published through the Internet. In published discussion of science blogs strong claims have been made about their potential to support broad social engagement with science. It has also been claimed that science blogging has had direct impacts on the conduct and governance of science. This chapter notes that much of this commentary has been written by advocates and, taking a more detached view, it focuses most on any evidence that scientists’ blogging opens the backstage processes of science (or science-in the-making) to wider view and public participation. A review of general characteristics of scientists’ blogs indicates they show low levels of interactivity and points to evidence of early disaffection with this medium of communication. It is shown that scientists’ blogs rarely facilitate access to science’s backstage processes. One exceptional case is climate science, as demonstrated in the “Climategate” affair. The chapter reviews the intense discussions of climate science in the blogosphere and the key role of blogs in “Climategate” and, drawing from the exceptional character of this case, discusses the factors constraining scientists’ adoption of blogs in their professional and public communication.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
We prefer to use the term mediatization to show that this is a different, somewhat broader media concept than the medialization approach that the editors use (see Chapter 1).
References
Baker, S. and H. Green (2005). Blogs will change your business. Business Week, 39(31), 56–67.
Batts, S. A., N. J. Anthis, and T. C. Smith (2008). Advancing science through conversations: Bridging the gap between blogs and the academy. PLoS Biology, 6(9), 1837–1841.
Black, R. (2010). UN climate body admits ‘mistake’ on Himalayan glaciers, BBC News website, posted 19 January 2010 (last accessed on March 15, 2010).
Bonetta, L. (2007). Scientists enter the blogosphere. Cell, 129(3), 443–445.
Boyce, T. and J. Lewis (eds.) (2009). Climate change and the media. New York: Peter Lang.
Bubela, T., et al. (2010). Science communication reconsidered. Nature Biotechnology, 27(6), 514–518.
Butler, D. (2005). Joint efforts. Nature, 438(1 December), 548–549.
Carroll, S. (2007). Blogging for physics. Physics World, January, 14.
Carvalho, A. (2007). Ideological cultures and media discourses on scientific knowledge: Re-reading news on climate change. Public Understanding of Science, 16(2), 223–243.
Courrielche, P. (2010). Peer-to-peer review: How Climategate marks the maturing of a new science movement, posted at http://bigjournalism.com/pcourrielche/2010/01/08/peer-to-peer-review-how-climategate-marks-the-maturing-of-a-new-science-movement-part-i/ (last accessed on October 11, 2010).
Curry, J. (2010). Reflections on climategate. People & Science, March 13.
Davidson, E. and E. Vaast (2009). Tech talk: An investigation of blogging in technology innovation discourse. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 52(1), 40–60.
Dumlao, R. and S. Duke (2001). The web and e-mail in science communication. Science Communication, 24(3), 283–308.
Elliott, S. (2006). Science blogs as a vehicle for upscale ads. The New York Times, January 20.
Fenner, M. (2008). Why do we blog and other important questions, answered by 34 science bloggers, posted on http://blogs.nature.com/mfenner/2008/11/30/why-do-we-blog-and-other-important-questions-answered-by-34-science-bloggers (last accessed on 11 March 2010).
Funtowicz, S. and J. Ravetz (1993). Science for the post-normal age. Futures, 25, 739–755.
Gavin, N. (2009). The web and climate change politics: Lessons from Britain. In T. Boyce and J. Lewis (eds.), Climate change and the media. New York: Peter Lang, pp. 129–144.
Gibbons, M., et al. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City, NJ: Doubleday.
Gramling, C. (2008). Science bloggers question their role. Geotimes, 53(6), 47.
Gregory, J. and S. Miller (1998). Science in public: Communication, culture and credibility. New York: Plenum Press.
Griffiths, M. (2007). Talking physics in the social web. Physics World, January 24–27.
Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere – An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hannay, T. (2007). Web 2.0 in science, CTWatch Quarterly, 3(3), 19–25.
Hewitt, H. (2005). Blog: Understanding the information reformation that’s changing your world. Nashville: Thomas Nelson.
Hilgartner, S. (2000). Science on stage: Expert advice as public drama. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Hughes, D. and R. Kellmann (2009). Blogging’s global impact and the future of blogging, posted at http://technorati.com/blogging/article/day-5-twitter-global-impact-and/page-2/ (last accessed on March 15, 2010).
Inter-Academy Council (2010). Climate change assessments – Review of the processes and procedures of the IPCC. Amsterdam: Inter-Academy Council.
Kouper, I. (2010). Science blogs and public engagement with science: Practices, challenges, and opportunities. Journal of Science Communication, 9(1), posted at http://jcom.sissa.it/archive/09/01/Jcom0901%282010%29A02/ (last accessed on December 22, 2010).
Kovic, I., I. Lulic, and G. Brumini (2008). Examining the medical blogosphere: An online survey of medical blogger. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 10(3), posted at http://www.jmir.org/2008/3/e28/ (last accessed on December 22, 2010).
Lagu, T., et al. (2008). Content of weblogs written by health professionals. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 23(10), 1642–1646.
Latour, B. (1987). Science in action – How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
MASIS Expert Group (2009). Challenging futures of science in society: Emerging trends and cutting-edge issues. Brussels: European Commission.
Massoli, L. (2007). Science on the net: An analysis of the websites of the European public research institutions, Journal of Science Communication, 6(3), posted at http://jcom.sissa.it/archive/06/03/JCOM0603%282007%29A03/ (last accessed on December 22, 2010).
McClellan, J. (2004). Inside the ivory tower. The Guardian, Online supplement (23 September), 24.
Minol, K., et al. (2007). Portals, blogs and co.: The role of the Internet as a medium of science communication. Biotechnology Journal, 2(9), 1129–1140.
Mooney, C. and S. Kirschenbaum (2009). Unpopular science. The Nation, August 17.
Nardi, B. A., et al. (2004). Why we blog. Communications of the ACM, 47(12), 41–46.
Nature (2009). Editorial: Filling the void. Nature, 458(19 March), 260.
Nature Methods (2009). Editorial: Lines of communication. Nature Methods, 6(3), 181.
Nielsen, M. (2009). Doing science in the open. Physics World, May.
Pearce, F. (2010a). Debate heats up over IPCC melting glaciers claim, NewScientist.com, posted 11 January 2010 (last accessed on March 15, 2010).
Pearce, F. (2010b). The Climate Files – The battle for the truth about global warming. London: Guardian Books.
Peterson, I. (2001). Touring the scientific web. Science Communication, 22, 246–255.
Pew Internet and American Life Project (2006). The Internet as a resource for news and information about science, posted at http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2006/The-Internet-as-a-Resource-for-News-and-Information-about-Science.aspx (last accessed on March 11, 2010).
Rogers, R. and N. Marres (2000). Landscaping climate change: A mapping technique for understanding science and technology debates on the World Wide Web. Public Understanding of Science, 9(2), 141–163.
Rosenbloom, A. (2004). The blogosphere. Communications of the ACM, 47(12), 31–33.
Rzepa, H. (1998). The Internet as a medium for science communication. In E. Scanlon et al. (eds.), Communicating science: Volume 1 – Professional contexts. London: Routledge, pp. 141–149.
Secko, D. (2007). Scooped by a blog. The Scientist, 21(4), 21.
Sifry, D. (2006). State of the blogosphere. October 2006, posted 7 August 2006 at http://www.sifry.com/alerts/archives/000443.html (last accessed on March 15, 2010).
Sifry, D. (2008). State of the blogosphere. September 2008, posted 22 September 2008 at http://www.sifry.com/alerts/2008/09/technoratis-state-of-the-blogosphere-september-2008/ (last accessed on December 17, 2010).
Sunstein, C. R. (2007). Republic.com 2.0. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Technorati (2010). State of the Blogosphere 2010 at http://technorati.com/blogging/feature/state-of-the-blogosphere-2010/ (last accessed on December 17, 2010).
Tola, E. (2008). To blog or not to blog, not a real choice there. Journal of Science Communication, 7(2), posted at http://jcom.sissa.it/archive/07/02/Jcom0702%282008%29C01/Jcom0702%282008%29C06, (last accessed on December 22, 2010).
Tomlin, S. (2007). Blogging science. Science & Public Affairs, September 23.
Trench, B. (2007). How the Internet changed science journalism. In M. Bauer and M. Bucchi (eds.), Journalism science and society. London: Routledge, pp. 133–142.
Trench, B. (2008). Internet: Turning science communication inside-out. In M. Bucchi and B. Trench (eds.), Handbook of public communication of science and technology. London: Routledge, pp. 185–198.
Trench, B. (2009). Science reporting in the electronic embrace of the Internet. In R. Holliman, E. Whitelegg, E. Scanlon, S. Smidt, and J. Thomas (eds.), Investigating science communication in the information age: Implications for public engagement and popular media. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 166–180.
Turner, A. (2010). The poisonous pro-am clash in the boffins’ blogosphere. Sunday Times, February 28.
Valiverronen, E. (2001). From mediation to mediatization: The new politics of communicating science and technology. In U. Kivikuru and T. Savolianen (eds.), The politics of public issues. Helsinki: Department of Communication, University of Helsinki, pp. 157–177.
Waldrop, M. (2008). Science 2.0: Great new tool or great risk? Scientific American, May, 68–73.
Weingart, P. (1998). Science and the media. Research Policy, 27(8), 869–879.
Wilkins, J. (2008). The roles, reasons and restrictions of science blogs. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 23(8), 411–413.
Acknowledgments
The author acknowledges the assistance of graduate student Sean Marshall in the review of general features of science blogs.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Trench, B. (2012). Scientists’ Blogs: Glimpses Behind the Scenes. In: Rödder, S., Franzen, M., Weingart, P. (eds) The Sciences’ Media Connection –Public Communication and its Repercussions. Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook, vol 28. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2085-5_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2085-5_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-2084-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-2085-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)