Kind of a hodge podge title but I didn't feel like writing two separate posts.
Current Science had a special focus a couple of weeks ago on science writing in India. Seema Singh has written quite well about her struggles to become a better science writer. She summarizes the state of science writing in India:
Science is just about reviving in India. People mention that the first time in three decades such a coordinated effort is being mounted to infuse funds and sparkle in Indian science. But there still are not too many stories that can be told with a single-sentence punch line. In which case, the art of chronicling the process becomes even more important. Now, whether the body of knowledge will help here, or the skill of storytelling, is left to my mind, to individual communicators, specialists or non-specialists. For me, personally, it is about homework and humility, intricate osmosis of critical inquiry and sensitivity, the spirit of curiosity, sense of wonder, and, of course, fact checking.
That's an important point about what and how science gets covered. Far too often, the media either exults in and tries to claim an Indian connection to a notable piece of research by an Indian scientist who left the country 20 years ago, or features scientists based in India only during satellite launches, nuclear power plant protests or major earthquakes. Science as an activity and scientists in their day to day working avatar are rarely featured. A trigger to change this could come from within too. Few Indian scientists today are using social media platforms to initiate a conversation with the public. There has been a small increase in the number of Indian scientists who do blog with biologists and ecologists (1, 2) taking the lead, but my impression is that far too many write about everything else but their research.
Seema Singh also writes about her interesting encounter back in 2001 with evolutionary paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould who popularized the field of evolution like no other writer except perhaps Richard Dawkins. Gould along with Niles Eldredge proposed the controversial and widely misunderstood theory of punctuated equilibrium. Seema Singh describes it thus: ... which propounded that evolution takes place in rapid spurts of species differentiation, not in continuous transformations.
I wanted to expand on this.
Current Science had a special focus a couple of weeks ago on science writing in India. Seema Singh has written quite well about her struggles to become a better science writer. She summarizes the state of science writing in India:
Science is just about reviving in India. People mention that the first time in three decades such a coordinated effort is being mounted to infuse funds and sparkle in Indian science. But there still are not too many stories that can be told with a single-sentence punch line. In which case, the art of chronicling the process becomes even more important. Now, whether the body of knowledge will help here, or the skill of storytelling, is left to my mind, to individual communicators, specialists or non-specialists. For me, personally, it is about homework and humility, intricate osmosis of critical inquiry and sensitivity, the spirit of curiosity, sense of wonder, and, of course, fact checking.
That's an important point about what and how science gets covered. Far too often, the media either exults in and tries to claim an Indian connection to a notable piece of research by an Indian scientist who left the country 20 years ago, or features scientists based in India only during satellite launches, nuclear power plant protests or major earthquakes. Science as an activity and scientists in their day to day working avatar are rarely featured. A trigger to change this could come from within too. Few Indian scientists today are using social media platforms to initiate a conversation with the public. There has been a small increase in the number of Indian scientists who do blog with biologists and ecologists (1, 2) taking the lead, but my impression is that far too many write about everything else but their research.
Seema Singh also writes about her interesting encounter back in 2001 with evolutionary paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould who popularized the field of evolution like no other writer except perhaps Richard Dawkins. Gould along with Niles Eldredge proposed the controversial and widely misunderstood theory of punctuated equilibrium. Seema Singh describes it thus: ... which propounded that evolution takes place in rapid spurts of species differentiation, not in continuous transformations.
I wanted to expand on this.