The late night musings of a young and inexperienced science writer

[This blog post contains a disgusting amount of writing in the first person singular. Being very much a 'blogging-thoughts-out-loud' post, it just came out that way.]

Science Diction has been in existence for just over a year now. I started the blog with good intentions and full of enthusiasm for science and writing. I thought I was capable of producing a half-decent science blog. Easy, no? But how naive I was. Ten measly posts later, and I haven’t really done or achieved much with the blog. Being a young and very inexperienced blogger/writer can be very difficult. With the science communication field ever expanding, and many established and elegant science writers/bloggers gracing all media and all corners of social networking outlets and the Internet in general, it’s easy to feel a tad out-of-line, out-of-place and insignificant. That’s not to excuse not blogging enough. I’m just freaking scared!

There are days when I feel like a fraudster for calling myself a science communicator or journalist. Whether it’s because I haven’t done enough science pieces yet, don’t have any confidence, or simply am not hired or employed by anyone per se*, I’m not sure. Would I feel better labelling myself an amateur science journalist? Not really. Mention anything related to sub-professional, and most people run away, shove their fingers in their ears, shut their eyes and don’t take notice of your work. *LA LA LA LA LA!* Understandably so.

But I cannot deny that I am relatively new to science blogging. I am 20 years old and I’m only doing a BSc. in Human Sciences. I am inexperienced and I am (in career terms) young. So are hundreds of my contemporaries around the globe, I’m sure. So where am I going wrong at present, what problems am I facing, and how can I overcome them to keep up a good science blog?

What exactly is the problem?

What should I write about? There is so much that I think and read about, but is anyone else really interested in that stuff? Do I put it out there and hope for the best? Or keep it locked up and forgo a possible embarrassment? (Duh, Lucy, you’re doing it right now!!!) Should science writing simply be informative or entertaining at the same time? Should I comment on old or new topics? Do people want a focus on science news analysis, the ins-and-outs of the science communication world, or journalism as a whole? Perhaps looking solely at original research and commenting on that would be best? Science communication is a specialism, with so many sub-specialities within it. Should I look at sci comms or actually communicate some science?! And well, science itself is pretty huge, and to write about all types of science well is something I’d love to do. But what angle should I take? This all leads me to another problem…

Who are my audience? Who are my audience?! I don’t know! If I don’t know who I’m writing for, how and what do I write? If I don’t know what to write about, how can I target an audience? You get the gist…

How often should I post? I don’t want to type up a post about something current and then finish and publish it days later. At the same time, i don’t want to rush a post and compromise on quality. Finding a balance between quantity and quality can be particularly difficult for new bloggers of all genres.

Is my writing of a good enough quality for me to think ‘I should publish this.’?

When can I call myself a science writer/journo?

Perhaps none of this matters – after all, bloggers the world over have these problems and thoughts no doubt, and they just write anyway… Just write, Lucy, just writeeee! Go with the flow! (If only I wasn’t so paranoid and picky…)

What am I doing wrong?

Looking back on posts I have published so far, mindlessly writing about the national news coverage of individual science stories isn’t the best thing to do, unless you’re really going to critically appraise it, and spend time analysing situations, debates, the history behind the story, different outlets’ takes. etc. Passing short commentaries on news stories by one news site doesn’t help anyone. It’s boring, too easy and can be done in the pub garden or first thing in the morning over soldiers and eggs. If I’m going to comment on the news, I should do it with vigour!

In addition, worrying about views and followers is a pretty stupid thing to do. I used to do so. Perhaps the few minutes spent gazing at page stats everyday would be better spent researching or editing new posts. Of course, more views and followers would be nice, but it’s good to remember that being viewed or followed doesn’t necessarily mean that your content is getting out there or being read, especially when you have some extremely dubious referrers…

My advice (so far) to new science bloggers…

If you don’t often post on your science blog, continuously write elsewhere – whether it’s for non-science projects or in a personal diary at home. Stop writing and you’ll find that your creative juices stop flowing.

Get on Twitter! Some of you may have noticed that I joined the social networking site joined in January 2010 but have only become active in the past week or so. But my goodness… the amount I’ve learnt from and about science journos and bloggers on Twitter amounts to more than I’ve learnt in my entire life about the science writing world. Seriously. Connect to quality science writers and read their content. Read the content written by other people that those writers recommend. Keep abreast of emerging science topics and debates. Ask more senior and experienced writers questions. Follow science news outlets from around the globe and cast a critical eye on their stories. Of all this will, without a doubt, improve the way you write and think about writing. One other cool aspect of using Twitter, is that you quickly learn who-knows-who – and more importantly for you – who you should follow and learn from. Follow one amazing science blogger and you’ll almost instantly find a dozen more great sci bloggers to follow**. Twitter is not only a hub for celebs and their chasers. It’s an amazing place for finding people relevant to your career. For someone in science journalism in particular, Twitter is a rich and diverse learning and research tool.

The end is nigh…

Blogging and writing can be a lonely business and it’s especially important that we stay connected in the science communication world. Perhaps it’s time for a young science writers’ meeting-of-sorts? A heap of science writing conventions take place in various places all over the world, but I can’t help but feel that these are aimed at established science writers. And as many of us younger and new science writers are students who probably can’t afford a trip to such gatherings even if we wanted to, an online forum for the newbies could be a good idea. Hmm. More food for thought…

I’ve posed so many questions here, and most of them I’ll have to answer for myself. Discovering how to do things right can be a scary process, but I won’t be put off by that. All I can do for now is try to have some faith in my writing and continue to read other bloggers’ work for inspiration. Here’s to turning over a new leaf for Science Diction!

* I have written for student publications, (once) written the News and Views section for a scientific journal, and write for a London magazine blog.

** For absolute Twitter noobs, a good example of one such science blogger is @BoraZ. He shares lots of lovely sciency links throughout the day; both his own blog posts and others worth checking out.

Find me at @lucy_pereira

Google has stopped censoring its Chinese search engine

Long-awaited news from Google broke within the last hour regarding its position with Google China. The company leading the giant search engine had complained of complex cyber-attacks and hacking originating from China only a couple of months ago. Despite the Chinese government’s warnings, Google has ceased censorship of the Google China search engine, and it’s being reported that users are being redirected to the uncensored Hong Kong Google site.

Chinese Google Site

Cheating on your partner? There’s an app for that.

An iPhone app released only two days ago has become the hot topic on everyone’s lips. Called TigerText, the application allows users to ‘send texts that don’t live forever’ and makes messages of a certain age wipe themselves from both the sender and recipient’s phones. Its potential as a tool for unfaithful men and women has already become the subject of much debate on the internet, although for obvious reasons, its creators are not marketing the app as such. However, with a name like TigerText, we can be sure that this use of the application was at the front of the creator’s mind, what with a certain Mr. Woods and his numerous affairs having been uncovered not too long ago across global media.

http://www.tigertext.com/

Many people are questioning whether this application is morally just. However, if someone really wanted to, they could do exactly what this app does by themselves. All that this application does is remove the need for the adulterous partner to have to remember to delete any suspicious texts from their phone. Plus, there are other ways in which this service can be used; for example, when planning a surprise party. However, anyone using TigerText for an innocent reason should be cautious – no one wants their partner to think they’re cheating when they’re not actually cheating!

The iPhone, modelled by Thing *click click*

Wondering how it works?

‘When you send a regular text message, the message is sent from your phone, routed through a server, and then delivered to the recipient’s phone. The message you send will live on the receiver’s phone until the recipient decides to delete it. The text message will also reside on the cell phone company’s server for an unlimited amount of time. TigerText is different because, even though it looks and feels identical to a normal text message, the content of your message is never sent to the recipient’s phone and you control when the message is deleted from our server so you control the lifespan of the message!’ [From the TigerText site]

For those of you BlackBerry users out there, looking to hide your naughty secret, don’t despair. The creators of TigerText are developing a version of the app for BB, which will be released soon.

Now, if only there was an app to clear a guilty conscience…

The animal that lives up to its name…

I read about the horrible death of a Seaworld trainer (Dawn Brancheau) yesterday and again today – this time finding out that the trainer had been attacked in front of an audience. 16 years working for SeaWorld ended so tragically.

‘SeaWorld trainer dies in killer whale attack in

Orlando’

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8535618.stm

It's called killer whale for a reason...

But I couldn’t help but think to myself about whether should we really be interacting with animals such as the killer whale? There might just be a clue in the name, I think. Plus the fact that Tilly the killer whale (now Tilly the murdering killer whale) is a repeat offender really points out that maybe, he in particular, should not have been kept for training. Do killer whales actually want to be trained?! I highly doubt it. These animals are not in their natural environment – so for them to act weirdly and in uncontrollable ways in places such as SeaWorld like in this instance, is natural, and to some extent, should be expected.

Whilst I have no doubt that the trainer absolutely enjoyed her job and was a very competent and knowledgable trainer, I do think that sometimes,  that we have to leave certain animals alone. If you want to play with a dolphin, fine. Feel like teaching your dog how to roll over – okay. Animal training for public entertainment has gone a bit crazy, what with SeaWorld and other such tourist attractions. If we wish to continue working so closely with creatures such as the killer whale, death will inevitably be a risk we take.

I would like to say though, that my heartfelt sympathy goes out to Ms. Brancheau’s family. She died doing a job she most probably absolutely loved doing, but her time here has passed too soon.

Sting in the tail for Dr Simon Singh

Read Simon Singh’s article on the ongoing libel case between him and the British Chiropractic Association here.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/7294539/Simon-Singh-it-is-too-late-for-me-but-libel-laws-must-change-for-the-public-good.html

Support Simon – join this Facebook group and find petitions and cause sites on the group page. It’s a small gesture, but every little helps:

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=33457048634

Support Simon Singh!

Newham fights chlamydia via letterboxes!

Waking up quite late on Friday, I found that mail had been placed next to my bed. (My uncle has now become an internal postie at my nan’s house, how sweet!) A letter AND a package! ‘Fantastic!’, I thought, as I rubbed the sleep from my eyes and tried to guess what the package was. However, I was sure that I hadn’t bought anything to be delivered to my place. As I tried to recall if I’d been on eBay, I examined the package for clues. Then, in small writing on the front near my name, I found the ‘return to’ address…

‘Chlamydia Screening Team, NHS Newham, 2 Western Gateway, Royal Victoria Dock, London, E16 1DR’.

I found myself utterly confused. Why would I have received a package from this Chlamydia Screening Team? I hadn’t been to an STI clinic ever, and have never needed to. In fact, I’d only been to hospital recently for my tonsil problems. Thinking that I had misread the sender’s details wrong in my half-sleepy state, I went over the details yet again. I hadn’t read them wrong. I can hardly say that I opened the package with great vigour as the idea of what might be in the package creeped me out a bit. Overcoming apprehension, I carefully ripped opened the size D package (showing off my eye for detail there) and read the letter that accompanied the contents of the package, which were, unhelpfully, wrapped in an opaque plastic bag.

The PCT of common sense...

‘Dear Miss …,

Your NHS Newham PCT is working with the local Chlamydia Screening Team to offer all 15-24yr olds the opportunity to take a free Chlamydia screening test. This is part of a National Programme to offer young people access to FREE chlamydia screening. According to our records, you are in this age range.’

Ah, relief. There was me thinking that perhaps the NHS Newham Trust were sending me chlamydia as a late Valentine’s Day present. But no – the package was simply a self-test kit for chlamydia. But then, panic struck – the postman was able to see the sender’s details. Oh no! Mr Postman might think that I’m a hussy! What to do, what to do?! Obviously, I still hadn’t woken up fully, otherwise I would have realised that EVERYONE aged 15-24 years old would have received one – in which case, Mr Postman would have thought that Newham had become a borough full of hussies. That is, unless my household was the only one with a young person that my postman delivers to. (Unlikely, I know… especially in a borough with one of the highest concentrations of young people in the UK). Although the idea of this service seems great, NHS Newham didn’t necessarily have to print ‘Chlamydia Screening Team’ on the front of the parcels.  Perhaps they should have stamped ‘promiscuous’ or ‘sexually active’ on the parcels instead. After all, that’s probably what many parents and guardians across the borough must have thought about their kids if they caught sight of the phrase ‘Chlamydia Screening Team’ on these packages. I can only imagine that the death toll of youngsters around this area may have slightly increased over the weekend, what with furious elders hitting the roof about all this ‘sexual activity’…

I only just opened up the package. A urine sample container dropped out, with a testing guide, freepost envelope and labels. Most weirdly, the NHS trust thought they’d take this opportunity to also supply a bright green squidgy armband that charities have come to love to promote their causes.

‘www.checkurself.org.uk’  is embossed on the band.

Shudder. Why anyone would wear this armband is beyond me. As for the spelling of ‘yourself as ‘urself’ – the trust trying to be down with the youngsters there, no doubt… I am still shuddering from the sight of this appalling attempt at promotion. So cringeworthy…

Other gripes with this package include the letter writer’s indecisiveness with their capitalisation of the word ‘chlamydia’ and the way the age range targeted by this scheme is typed as ’15-24yr olds’. That’s probably just me being picky though!

I guess if my contemporaries out there in the borough who need to use this service actually make use of it, and some of those people are identified and successfully treated for the STI, the embarrassment that comes with the packages are worth it. But next time, dear NHS Newham Trust, please be a bit more discreet when printing out the package labels!

Good things come to those who wait. Patience, Media!

A BBC News article regarding the Belgian ‘coma’ man has been published today, under the headline: ‘Belgian coma ‘writer’ Rom Houben can’t communicate’. Only three months ago, the site stated that Mr Houben had been able to communicate using a special keyboard fitted to his wheelchair, after a scan in 2006 ‘revealed’ that Mr Houben’s brain was near fully functional – despite Houben’s medical team having previously thought that he was permanently comatose after a car crash in 1983. In the original article, Mr Houben’s mother had even claimed that he was writing a book. But after this latest news story, it seems that Mr Houben’s doctor was wrong.

After quandaries such as what is being called ‘Climategate’ and the MMR scandal, reporting such as this example from the BBC News website is very irresponsible. The rat race to break stories in this age means that less time is taken to check the validity of science claims made, resulting in wishy-washy statements, or recalls on information given out, as is seen in this case. Scientific studies sometimes take years to complete, and this rush to publish stories before research has been published and peer-reviewed – as was the case when Mr Houben first came to media attention – inevitably means that scientists will be backtracking on claims they have once made.  At least, these stories make our scientists seem indecisive, with the inability to agree on the most pressing issues in the world today.  At most, the credibility of the work carried out by most of the talented and honest scientists is put on the line – which would have massive consequences in policy-making and the general population’s willingness to back new science ventures in the future. A relative of mine – a non-scientist it’s worth pointing out – had even gone so far as to say that scientists are liars that have too much time on their hands, carrying out novelty studies that do not contribute to society.

The public and the media shouldn’t be afraid to be sceptical about claims made by scientists – and that also includes other scientists – “It’s like using an Ouija board,” Arthur Caplan, a bioethics professor at the University of Pennsylvania, stated – talking about the method that Mr Houben’s therapists were using to show that Houben was able to ‘communicate’.  Professor Caplan continued, “It was too good to be true and we shouldn’t have believed it.”

If the author of the initial coma article had waited until the conclusion of the study that included Mr Houben in its sample, they probably would never have had to publish his doctor’s mistake. Until media consumers and outlets the world over become more critical, and until media outlets learn to hold back or not publish a story at all, the science world’s credibility will continue to diminish.