Thanks for blogging it and some of the other colloquia (I peeked)…. this is great that there are other bloggers lurking in the Physics and Astronomy Department!

Come back here and read and comment from time to time.

-cvj

(For the record, as for who I am, I’m a physics grad student at USC who’s…been in school way too long. I’m trying to finish up my doctoral dissertation (my research adviser is Dr. Darrell Judge), but it’s taking me much longer than it should…though admittedly a large part of the reason for that is because I’m trying to do too much else at the same time and not putting in as much time on my research as I should…still, I hope to be done by the end of the summer.)

Regarding the “you’re always out of context” bit–well, that was a direct quote, but I’m afraid I may have taken it, um, out of context. All of the points she expanded on in much more detail in her talk than the brief summaries I wrote in my post, of course, and yes, that quote did make more sense at the end of the rest of what she’d said. I think Dr. Johnson’s explanation better captures what that point was about. She certainly wasn’t saying that context wasn’t at all important, and if that’s the impression I gave by just quoting that one sentence, mea culpa.

I think in that case the reporter was not as accurate as could have been. That was her last sentence…… she actually said a lot more on context. The point of the last sentence (the one quoted) is that there is a limit to how far you should go in chasing down the issue of being quoted out of context….. you have to let it go at some point…within reason.

Diminishing returns and all that.

Indeed, she did say more than just that sentence.

Cheers,

-cvj

Scientists doing their jobs properly will be very careful about the words they use - both to each other and to the ‘public’ at large (for instance see the example set in Sean’s post pointing out the WMAP’s PI Chuck Bennett’s careful choice of words). Indeed, words express how we think and clarity of language begats clarity of thought… but it is not just the words themselves, but also their context and the cavets and qualifiers that we add that are important. Quoting out of context changes meaning and of course … meaning is everything.

To just dismissely wave one’s hand and say one is always out of context misses the point. Seldom is what any of us say 100% correct and covers all possibilities, but we do our best. Context being an elusive thing means that everyone is always out of context and therefore there is no reason that a reporter has any less right or reponsibility to ‘context’ than scientists themselves.

My personal experience on a few isolated occasions of giving comments is in having my caveats dropped and my quote bracketed by phrases that I didn’t ascribe to or believe. In essence I was endorsing views that didn’t hold at all. If context is meaning then why quote me at all?

I wasn’t at the KC’s talk though, so perhaps I am taking all the above out of context! I did always enjoy reading her when I lived in LA.

Anyway, Michael Pollan said that the way he gets people to read about science is not to tell them explicitly that he’s writing about it. He writes about gardening and food and then slips the science into the narrative where it comes up. So he chooses the stealth approach to get around barriers that people might reflexively put up against reading what they perceive to be another boring science story. It’s kind of like hiding the pill in the Gainesburger when you give your dog medicine.

Some time ago I was interviewed by Robert Krulwich of NPR. He has several fantastic features among them having a real fascination for science and being a great storyteller. He suggested that storytelling can be a gateway drug to deeper things - things like an appreciation for science that starts to spark a bit of curiosity.

The NovaNow series takes this approach and does an excellent job. For an example of what can be done on an audio blog (and I think that this approach needs to be audio or video to reach a general audience) consider his piece on NPR’s All Things Considered last night (listen rather than read).

Find some fascinating results (not necessarily your own current work … there are great stories from the 18th century!) and develop a narrative. If you aren’t a great story teller, find one and collaborate.