Labs

Do Science Bloggers Exercise Free Will?

2011-09-30T12:07:00.000-07:00

That's the question--as I stare at the census data in search of a juicy trend--that would seem the most sensational and draw the most readers. A trend...that challenges the notion that you decide how often you post and how much time you invest in each post. To find it, having already decided it's there, I broke my brain a couple of times combining three census data sets: (1) Years Blogging; (2) Blogging Frequency; and (3) Time Investment Per Blog Post. Below are the fruits of my labors. Did I find the trend I was looking for? A trend that suggests the longer you blog, the more likely it will be that you will spend 1 to 2 hours writing about one post per week? Judge for yourself.

Frequency As A Percentage Of Each Group By Years Blogging

Time Per Post As A Percentage Of Each Group By Years Blogging

My feeling is I didn't find a trend. My kung fu is not yet strong enough. Nevertheless, if you're wondering how your blogging habits compare with your peers, now you know. Maybe they know something you don't, like a substantial time investment per post does pay off in the long run--you should try it. Or, you don't have to post every day after all. Or, the secret to blogging longevity.

Oh, and the above is just the end result. How I got there was just as much fun... From my scratch paper:

Are Female Science Bloggers More Likely To Blog Anonymously Than Male Science Bloggers?

2011-09-23T15:01:00.000-07:00

Google+'s real name policy sparked a lively debate in the science blogosphere. On the side of anonymity it was observed that women risk more than men when they use their real names.

We know that women experience 25 TIMES the amount of harassment online that men do.

I light of this blanket disparity in risk you might expect to find--or even assume--that the percentage of women in science blogging anonymously is greater than that of their male counterparts. Sifting through the Census of Science Bloggers data I realized I had a sample with which to test this assumption.

But to get there I first had to answer another burning question: I wonder what the overall gender ratio is among science bloggers? The answer, based on the census data, is approximately 2 male science bloggers for every 1 female science blogger.

Again, based on the census sample, 15% of all science bloggers post anonymously.

Now does that percentage change when you divvy the sample up into male and female? Do women, considering the additional risk they incur by using their real names, account for a disproportionate percentage of the anonymous? It turns out that the answer is no, and although the difference is small enough to be insignificant given the sample size, according to the census data male science bloggers are 2.2% more likely to blog anonymously than women science bloggers.


Male Anonymity: 15.3%	Female Anonymity: 13.1%

Where Should Science Bloggers Look For Traffic?

2011-09-20T16:30:00.000-07:00

The Census of Science Bloggers 2011 asked, Excluding search engines, what is your primary traffic driver? After eliminating for single instances and some standardization, the breakdown is as follows:

Twitter (70)
Facebook (59)
Links from Other Blogs (45)
Reddit (14)
ResearchBlogging (13)
Feed Subscriptions (10)
Google+ (8)
Commenting on Other Blogs (7)
Science Blog Network (7)
Return/Direct (4)
StumbleUpon (4)
Tumblr (3)
FriendFeed (2)
LinkedIn (2)
MetaFilter (2)

Gee. Twitter and Facebook top the list. What a surprise. Well yes, confirming what we already know isn't that useful (unless you're not already syndicating your content to Twitter and Facebook). But keep in mind that this is a list of primary traffic drivers, which means that each site on the list has the potential to send you more traffic than any other source. The trick is knowing how to tap that potential.

What are we really talking about then? Because there are trade-offs in time and energy, and if you're like me, both of those are in short supply. I look at that list and think, I'd love to maximize my Twitter and Facebook potential, but frankly, to do so would require more time and effort than I'm willing to devote to those particular websites. I'm not interested in being on Facebook. Not really. And while I find Twitter more appealing than FB, again, I'd rather be doing something else. But still, I'm no expert in either Twitter or Facebook, so I couldn't tell you how to maximize your traffic from either of those sources. That would be useful information.

Going down the list (subscription link to my blog feed is prominently displayed, check; I don't have a lot of time to comment on other blogs, not checked; I'm on a network so links from other blogs is covered, check; I'm going to join Google+ any day now, check; etc.) I see something that I am an expert in, something that I can share with you how to turn into a primary traffic driver for your blog. That site is Reddit, and while it may seem very confusing at first, it's the primary traffic driver that fits my schedule best (because it doesn't require my constant attention), and it's actually quite simple to understand/navigate once you get the hang of it. I've even already written up the how to: Science Blogging and Reddit

So you see. That was useful after all. Now all I need is for someone to explain FriendFeed to me.

The Science Blogosphere's Advice to Science Bloggers

2011-09-19T09:58:00.000-07:00

Have faith in your audience. Kill them with kindness. Those are my golden rules for blogging, and how I answer The Census of Science Bloggers 2011 question: In a sentence, your best science blogging advice for fellow science bloggers.

Over 190 science bloggers (a majority of census participants) also answered the call for advice. Their collected response adds up to 2,492 words of wisdom.

The Wordle treatment resulted in a primitive but still unambiguous message: write fun just make blog post interesting writing

Live Science Blogger's Collected Advice Tag Cloud

Be social. Love it, have fun, and think about your audience. Just do it and be yourself. Science is a foreign language for some; strive to be an effective translator. Have fun. Try everything, and don't be afraid to fail often. Write on what you are passionate and ignore the rest. Just do it. Don't think too much about the pros and cons. Don't do it unless it provides value for yourself as well as for whatever audience you might acquire. Keep on keepin' on. Follow up on the things you're curious about. Have fun, but remember that having fun doesn't mean you have to sacrifice your scientific integrity. When a detailed, referenced post you worked on for 3 weeks is trounced traffic-wise by a teeny silly re-tweet or re-post of a comic you published 10 minutes later, let it go; someone will probably read the long one too...sigh.... Pick a schedule for posting (weekdays, once a week, whatever) and stick to it! Blog for yourself: write about what catches your interests and passion. Just do it! Don't be afraid to post whatever comes to mind. It will be forgotten by tomorrow anyway. Blog consistently. Just open a new post and start thinking out loud. Don't just repeat/report what a scientific paper says, but in more general language - make unexpected connections/associations. I'm not in a position to give advice to anyone... But anyway! I guess you just have to take into consideration your target audience. Other than that, be yourself, and if that doesn't work, be funny. Want to make a blog item different? Ask an outside expert to comment on it. Write fewer but more thoughtful posts. Write for yourself, not for what you think other people want. Keep it simple. Please be patient. Even if you will have only one post in your blog, go and publish it. Self-editing skills are always worth improving. Don't listen to advice. For motivation, it's best to blog about things you're genuinely interested in, otherwise it's a chore. But it can also be a good incentive to brush up on some topic that you've always been meaning to get around to but haven't found the time. Nevermind the abundance other bloggers write in: do it at your own pace. Be vivid, be lively, have a great title. Go with your passion.
Share what interests you. Just do it and don't be afraid to make mistakes. Read other blogs. Blog what you know in your own voice. Write about your passions! Be yourself! Just do it. Don't be afraid to discuss topics that are well covered so long as you have a distinct voice in doing so. Be yourself. Keep writing. Have fun doing it, especially since the pay (if any) is horrible. If you're writing for the general public, remember that three out of every four american adults doesn't have a four year college degree. Don't take yourself too seriously... have fun! Write about topics with broad interest but say something of your own to make your post more than just a regurgitation of a press release. Blog what you're passionate about and don't be afraid if that changes over time. Do your own thing. Write daily. Be careful when checking out the sites sending you traffic, for there is always the chance that they contain horrific pornography. This is the internet, after all. Read everyone else, don't spend too much time reading yourself. Post on vaccines if you want to attract the crazies. Find something interesting, add something more to the subject and most of all - check your facts. Link intellegently: link to source documents when possible and use meaningful text as the link name (ie don't link to the word "here"). Enjoy what you're writing! Make it interesting and not too long! And include free images from Wikimedia Commons http://commons.wikimedia.org. Do what you love. I love sharing science, so I blog. Write about what you know, do your research, and make sure you're writing something which has interest to other people. Keep your reading up to date and be prepared to be told you're wrong the whole time! Get linked to from Pharyngula. I'm still trying to figure out what I'm doing, so it's better I not give advice yet! Always cite the original source. Write more, worry less. I'm still new, but I find it good to read a lot of other blogs to get a feel for whats trending. Blog about what you love. Tell the world about your passion. Use Twitter! Share your ideas with world, the better way to learn. Just keep practicing! Blogging is a great way to express yourself about you or a topic you just adore, or to even educate people. Write often - the more you practice the better you get!
Share your fun with science and your interests for others. Blog like no one is watching you; by which I mean, naked. I don't seem to be able to keep myself from compulsive rewriting, probably because I have spent decades as a professional science writer. I'm not sure that's good advice for blogging, but OTOH I'm distressed by general blog sloppiness, sometimes even from good writers. No way around it, speed is usually the enemy of good writing (and accuracy.) Your audience will only be as enthusiastic about your writing as you are. At this point in the game there are plenty of options regarding your blogging approach/style. Find yourself a niche and you'll do great. Write as much as possible, share as much as possible, comment as much as possible and be true to your own writing style. Challenge your readers. Just do it. Babe Ruth hit a lot of home runs, but he also struck out a lot. We remember him for the home runs. Keep your audience in mind, even if you don't have a real one and are still trying to build one. Keep an even tone, but be entertaining & interesting - people love humor & beautiful pictures & imagination. Don't cuss too much. Approach controversial issues with balance & tact, but of course state your opinion. Be professional. Keep it focussed so people know what your blog is for. If you have a lot of good ideas for posts, spread them out over a few weeks so you don't run out of material after blogging for a month. Find out some obscure facts (you'll usually remember a few) and make things clear and entertaining. Somehow find the time to write. Write as often as you can, read as broadly as you can, and try and keep it short. Be useful, authentic and original. Don't let the cranks, that will comment your blogs affect you. Handle them calmly and if they overdo it, ban them. As a geek, I'll read outside my field if you give me the background to do it. Just blog it! Make it clear to you, then it will be clear for others. Blogging with passion, professionalism and competence. Write only about things you know. Be a "pop" science blogger. Be original. Enjoy what you do, write about what interests you, & don't worry about the traffic! Don't write for yourself but for your readers. Follow your heart. Don't write anything you wouldn't say in person. Never, ever patronize; never, ever waffle; never, ever bore. You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to a grandmother. Make it interesting and find out about the humans behind the science! Try to post often and regularly (which, of course, I fail to do). And try not to be obtuse. Just do it. Start with a plan - frequency - and look for on-line advice; comment frequently on other blogs.

Write about what you know, but it's more fun to write about what you DON'T know. Write about things that excite you. Write about what excites you, and you will excite the rest! If you want to illustrate a difficult concept, keep the example simple, but make the exemplars hilarious. Squirrels should be used to demonstrate correlation whenever possible. Write about what interests you. Science blogging is hard work. But someone has to do it. Do what you like, like what you do. Blog about what you know, tweet about what you kind of know, research the stuff you don't. Don't jump on bandwagons, stay true to your own ideas. Wear protective headgear, and don't be afraid to apologize. Write because you want to, never for any other reason. Don't listen to any advice - it's your blog so do your own thing! Do it because you love it and don't let it become a chore. Have fun, and write about what you love. If it's not interesting... don't post it. Be sure you're able to explain the research to a lay audience before you start writing. It's all about conversation so don't be afraid to take as risk as long as you are prepared to say you're sorry. Put a lot of links to my blog in your blog posts!!!! But seriously, before you say anything to anybody, imagine that you are saying it to their face at a bar and you are not too drunk yet. Be consistent! Write. Write. Write. Enjoy and love it. Blog to help yourself find your greatest interests and to find others who share those interests. Have fun with it. Engage people, answer in your comments. Write for the audience you want to have and they will find you. Just write. Write write write. Even if it's rubbish. Just write. Just think about the science you want to share, read science, write blog. Just start, commit to doing it regularly, and make it fun. It is very rewarding! Keep writing! The more you write the better you'll get! Or at least, that's my hope... Make sure you read plenty of other blogs before blogging and join Twitter! Write about what you enjoy and want to know about the world around you. "The main reason is that we love this stuff, and we think others should too." Provide the readers the data in a friendly format that allows them to decide if they want to pursue the original article further or use the information. If something grabs your attention, do what you can to explain it so it grabs someone else's attention, too. Blog about what you're interested in, even if you don't feel you know much about it. Consistency is key - figure out a schedule you can keep to, and maintain it consistently. Find a niche sparsely populated and dominate it. Write all the time. Never be afraid to press 'post'! If you don't try it, you'll never know what you could contribute to the blogosphere in terms of your science and your perspective. Go with your gut, there are a lot of people out the who share your same point of view; don't be afraid of social media, of reaching out to others, networking and branching out. Do it because you love it! It's not going to be worth the time and effort if you're not excited about what you're doing. Just write! It's fun and people will provide the feedback you need to improve. Write what you enjoy and find interesting - then it never feels like work! Update regularly and make videos. The videos are good attention grabbers for those with a cursory interest in the topic. Spread the geekiness! The more you do it, the better you get. But it has to be fun; if you're forcing yourself to write, you won't write anything worthwhile. The more eclectic and obscure the subjects, the better the associations you can make between them. Short & Sweet. Think what you want to read and do it slowly.

Make it as objective and down to earth as you can. Write about topics your friends want to read. Don't hide mathematics... Never stop. It does make a difference. The ideal is to investigate, verify the information, consult the sources and over all be able to enjoy and to captivate readers! For prospective bloggers: Just start, even if you don't think you have enough ideas to keep going very long: they'll come later. For people already blogging: keep doing what you're doing, but try and remember that people outside your field bubble exist. Just do what you want to do - you're not obliged to do it (unless you've signed a contract!) so if it's fulfilling, carry on. If it's not, you've no one to answer to. Provide links to sources, and make your writing accessible to the visually impaired by labeling everything. Aim to be accurate and understood and if you want to change minds, make sure you don't alienate them - preaching to the converted is boring. Do you own thing. Develop your own voice. Write about what catches your attention. Keep it short. Be true to yourself! Be prepared to be challenged: do your research, and cross your fingers that you've covered all your bases. Be consistent: it's not how often you post, but how consistently that keeps people coming back. Stick with what you find interesting and exciting. There will be others that find interesting and exciting the same things. Write about what you feel passionate about. Write about what amuses/interests/annoys you, not what you think others will be interested in.
We design lingerie for science. Connect! Don't blog just for the sake of it. Make sure you have something of interest. Make sure your facts are correct. Try to blog regularly to maintain interest. Don't over-think it. Just post when you're inspired. Just do it, stop procrastinating! Write as freely as you can, but don't be uselessly witty. Write more often than I do. And don't be afraid to add your voice to any topic if you feel strongly about it. Write, baby, write! (I should take my own advice.) Write what you care about, and what you enjoy - don't try to write about things because you think you should. Just be yourself - but with better grammar. Use accurate tags that relate to your post. Do your research, don't write too much, and share? Make it accessible to the readers! Don't be embarrassed to be totally excited about what you're blogging about! "To pretend, I actually do the thing: I have therefore only pretended to pretend." Know your target audience and aim the content accordingly. Use your blogging skills to meet other scientists. Sometimes it's hard to keep going (again!!). Keep the bloggy stuff in the back of your mind and take little notes to build up your pieces. Patience. Start, keep at it. That's what I'm doing. Always be sure of what you're posting by searching different and opposite sources, so that you can get to a strong conclusion. Write about what you want to talk about with other smart, passionate people (since the blogosphere is a conversation).

Is there something in there that affirms what you're doing, suggests what more you can do (or do differently) and/or inspires? What advice speaks to you?

3 More Science Bloggers Join FoS

2011-09-14T15:30:00.000-07:00

As always I'm very happy to announce the addition of new science blogs at FieldofScience. Please welcome (by way of visiting, subscribing to, favoriting, tweeting and of course reading):

The Census of Science Bloggers Wants You!

2011-08-22T14:29:00.000-07:00

The response thus far to the Census of Science Bloggers (2011) has been rather remarkable, especially when you consider it started on a Friday (never a good day to announce). But it's Monday now, which means it's time for this census worker--a hat I'll be wearing for the rest of August--to get to work.

The Challenge: How to circulate the Science Blogger Census to the whole of the science blogosphere in such a way that it doesn't become tedious?

Having thought about it, I can't say that I've come up with a perfect solution, but I do have a plan that at least tries to minimize the pain.

I would ask you, dear science blogger, to join me as a census worker and collect one census from one science blogger you personally know. You will send them a link to this very post (http://goo.gl/FzzZa) where they will find a link to the census form (http://goo.gl/2R31w) and these same instructions requesting that they do as you did--complete the census form and collect a single census from a science blogger they personally know.

If you are a contacted blogger but have already completed the census, simply proceed to part two and send the link to this post to a science blogger you personally know.

If you are a contacted blogger and have already completed the census and collected a single census from another science blogger, reply to the blogger trying to collect their census from you that they need to look elsewhere.

The key to this method is that you collect only one census--no more and no less. In this way, the effort (while not perfect) will eventually run its course and run out of steam. And in case it doesn't, the collection period ends September 1, 2011.

Thanks for your patience. I've taken a cursory look at the data collected so far, and can say the effort (and anoyance) are going to be well worth it.

Census of Science Bloggers (2011)

2011-08-19T10:40:00.000-07:00

Form: Census of Science Bloggers (2011). Short url: http://goo.gl/2R31w

Pass it on...

Census data will be used to create a 2011 snapshot of science bloggers. The data will be parsed and distilled down into hopefully helpful and informative charts and tables to be posted throughout the month of September.

2000-2010 Census

A portion of the data collected will also be added to the 2000-2010 census data flowchart.

Introducing /r/SciBlogs/

2011-08-05T16:12:00.000-07:00

Starting (or launching if you like) a much needed subreddit for science blogs: http://www.reddit.com/r/sciblogs/

Think of it as Editor's Picks for the science blogosphere. It's also an effective way to introduce science blogs to the general public.

---

I love science. I love blogging. Thus, FoS is a labor of love for me. But I don't just love and enjoy FoS. I'm a fan of all science blogs. The reason for this is an open secret among science blog readers--science blogs are the best place to get your science.

For example, we are expecting, and a few weeks back my wife came home with The Vaccine Book given to her by one of her coworkers. She asked me what I thought about it. Naturally I was skeptical. I first turned to google and quickly found myself sifting through anonymous opinions in a forum. Then it occurred to me that there was probably a reason the name "Dr. Sears" sounded familiar. I'd probably read about him on a science blog. So I went to The White Coat Underground and searched "Dr. Sears". The first result was a link in Respectful Insolence to Science-Based Medicine… That was easy.

However, this awareness of the value of science bloggers is relatively rare. Most people get their science news from mainstream media sources. Even science enthusiasts often rely on sources that simply regurgitate science press releases. What that suggests to me is there is a vast, untapped audience for science blogs out there. People who are interested in science and would happily choose a science blog over a press release, if only they new they had a choice.

Recently Bora launched his SciAm network. There was one reviewer who congratulated Bora for doing it right, but then went on to suggest that SciAm's rise might result in the demise of some of the smaller science blog networks. To paraphrase his reasoning, you can only read so many science blogs in the day. There's some truth that the pool of science blog readers/fans can only read so many science blogs in a day, but it's a mistake to assume that the reader base for science blogs is currently anywhere near its true potential.

Reddit is populated by, for the most part, non-science blog readers. But as I suggest above, it's not that the typical redditor isn't interested in science, it's that the typical redditor isn't in on the open secret that is science blogs, and so ends up relying on press releases or the media's rehashing of those press releases for the majority of their science news. If you want to reach this group, you have to go to them. That's what /r/sciblogs/ does--a subreddit devoted to science blogs where those of us who read science bloggers submit links to the gems we find.

Competition among science blogging entities is good, but the number of readers one network or blog can hope to poach from its peers pales in comparison to the number of potential science blog readers we can hope to persuade to turn away from mainstream media sources and press releases and turn to science blogs.

/r/sciblogs/ goal is to grow the audience for science blogs and to bring to that audience (and you and me) a daily dose of the best of science blogging.

Science Blogging and Reddit

2011-08-04T14:52:00.000-07:00

Dear Science Bloggers Everywhere:

We spend a lot of time composing our blog posts. This is good because content is king. But unless you are wildly popular, you are doing yourself a disservice if you don't spend a little more time smartly, efficiently and tastefully promoting your content after you post it. There are a lot of useful ways to market your latest posts, but here I want to talk about how best to submit your content to reddit.com.

Reddit is a collection of topical forums known as subreddits. There are subreddits for all sorts of topics, including many of the sciences:

/r/Anthropology/, /r/Astronomy/, /r/biology/, /r/chemistry/, /r/geology/, /r/mycology/, /r/Ornithology/, /r/linguistics/, /r/PhilosophyofScience, etc.

Chances are good there is a subreddit devoted to your field of study and/or the specific topic of your post. When you submit your content to reddit, don't just submit it to the main page--/r/reddit.com/--but instead take a minute or two to identify the appropriate subreddit for your content.

A Reddit Submission Form

What does submitting to the appropriate subreddit accomplish vs. submitting to the main page of reddit?

The main page of reddit receives hundreds, if not thousands of submissions per hour, so the chances that a large enough number of people trying to wade through that flood of information are going to notice your submission and upvote it enough times to bring it to everyone else's attention are slim to none. On the other hand, the rate of new submissions to topical subreddits is vastly lower, so not only will your post have longer in the new submissions queue to be noticed, the people checking the new submissions in a topical subreddit have self selected as being interested in the type of content you are submitting. Contrast this with the people sifting through the font page of reddit who are likely more interested in finding rage comics or pictures of cats than a review of a scientific paper.

And that is reddit. Simple really. Just take an extra 30 seconds to make sure you are submitting to the appropriate subreddit and you will tap into a resevour of science friendly readers who are telling you in no uncertain terms that they are interested in what you are blogging about.

Are we doomed?

2011-07-31T11:53:00.000-07:00

The Scream

#SciDoom: One of the quite little corners of the internet that I subscribe to is science writer/author Philip Ball's blog homunculus. Back in June Philip posted his answer to The New Statesman's question: Are we doomed? I immediately thought to myself, Cool question...I'd love to see science bloggers tackle it...en mass...how do I get this meme going...perhaps a Field of Science network theme week to lead the way.

Thus the genesis of this, Field of Science's first theme week where I asked the most interesting people I know--science bloggers--if they'd be interested in tackling this most intriguing question: Are we doomed? A bunch of them took me up on it, and we'll be posting their answers all week. So Yay! our first theme week at FoS, and such a cheerful theme too.

But what about the meme--the part where Are we doomed? goes viral throughout the science blogosphere and I get to read uncounted brilliant posts answering the question? Well, I can cross my fingers, hope, and start a hashtag: #SciDoom

Update: Index of posts.

3 More Science Bloggers Join Field of Science

2011-07-28T20:08:00.000-07:00

Please welcome 3 new science bloggers to FoS. Read, subscribe, you know the rest...

Chinleana

RRResearch

The Culture of Chemistry

How to tell the difference between a Science Blog Network, a Fanny Pack and a Backpack

2011-07-24T10:51:00.000-07:00

This is a network: http://scienceblogs.com
This is a fanny pack: http://blogs.nature.com
This is a backpack: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/science-blogs/

This is a network: http://www.fieldofscience.com/
This is a fanny pack: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/
This is a backpack: http://gu.com/scienceblogs

This is a network: http://sciblogs.co.nz/
This is a fanny pack: http://blogs.plos.org
This is a backpack: http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/

This is a network: http://scientopia.org/
This is a fanny pack: http://gam.southernfriedscience.com/
This is a backpack: http://www.labspaces.net/blogs

Field of Science Welcomes 7 New Science Blogs

2011-07-22T14:45:00.000-07:00

But before I get to the good stuff--new science bloggers--humor me while I digress and scratch the itch (read: kernel of truth) in the above joke.

About this time a year ago Bora left ScienceBlogs. In a post we're all familiar with, Bora speculated about the nature of science blog networks and their future. In that post, he mentions the other science blog networks including Field of Science. Networks he does not mention in that post dated July 19, 2010 include: Wired, Scientopia, Guardian, PLoS, SciAm^[1]. Why did Bora omit these science blog networks? Because, at that time, they didn't exist.

In the year since PepsiGate the aformentioned nonexistent science blog networks were born. In response to each "birth" the science blogosphere has found a reason or two to navel gaze and congradulate one another... Inevitably, these meta science blogging posts inspire comparisons and/or lists: of science blog networks. But if you were to use those posts to generate your own list of science blog networks, it would be far from complete. In fact, aside from ScienceBlogs, you'd be hard pressed to find a network on your list that existed prior to PepsiGate.

I've digressed because, frankly, I'm extremely unconforatble with PR--prefering instead to let the content speak for itself. But as a constant reader of Field of Science I have to say, the quality of the content is there, but it appears only a few people are listening (see dearth of inclusion of FoS detailed above).

I blame myself for this lack of awareness that Field of Science is a premier science blog network. I've failed to mention that it predated PepsiGate by well over a year; it finds and promotes new, fresh voices in science; it is diverse on every level; it is innovative and dynamic; and it was doing all these things and more long before those other networks even existed. So there, I've said it. Are you listening science blogosphere? The next time you put together a list of "high-profile" or "major" science blog networks, or decide to complain about a the old boys club^[2] in science blogging, will you include mention of Field of Science? If not, I'd like to know why not.

But now to the good stuff. The stuff that speaks for itself. The 7 new blogs at Field of Science:

Read them, comment, subscribe and expect more to come.

On the design side, we've added a drop down menu of blogs (because who can remember all those abbreviations) under the down arrow "↓" to the left of the quick navigation menu at the top of the page.

Finally, if you are new to Field of Science and now you are curious about FoS, we have an about page, a contact form and comments.

^[1] A list and a map (not to scale) of science blog networks.

^[2] But of course, if you include Field of Science, you'll have to use it as the exception to the rule.

ScienceBlogs 2.0 Redesign

2011-04-01T10:18:00.000-07:00

Today, ScienceBlogs launches a site makeover sponsored by Koch Industries. "Koch's vision for science communication...

Just Another Day at Field of Science

2011-03-31T10:51:00.000-07:00

Simply add "/view" to the end of any FoS blog URL (i.e. http://lpb.fieldofscience.com/view) for a fresh look at your favorite FoS blog.

Ultimate Space Widget

2011-03-08T20:51:00.000-08:00

Grab the script and drop it in your sidebar for a constant feed of the latest hand picked space news and images. While I'm not one to self-promote, I really must confess to being stupid good at what it is that this widget does.

TelescopeFeed Progress

2011-02-04T16:24:00.000-08:00

This is a quick update on TelescopeFeed.

1. I shuttered /r/FoS/ and moved the bulk of that activity to the TelescopeFeed blog Exo.

2. Layed the foundation for the "Observatory" blogs.

3. Turned on the lights and sent up the first flare.

Changelog

2011-01-27T15:30:00.000-08:00

I'll be experimenting with using The Greenhouse to reblog select science blog posts from across the science blogosphere. Format-wise, it's likely going to be a bit rough around the edges at first, so my apologies in advance.

TelescopeFeed

2011-01-03T16:24:00.000-08:00

For 2011 I'll be developing a sister science blog network to Field of Science called TelescopeFeed. While TelescopeFeed is little more than an address at this time, I expect my small but elite readership might enjoy watching the site as it is developed from the ground up. For you, I'll try to be good about posting updates at this feed and that feed.

As the name suggests, TelescopeFeed will aspire to be a space sciences science blog network (Astronomy, Astrophysics, Astrobiology, Exoplanetology, etc). If you know of any such scientists, engineers, journalists or amateurs who might be interested blogging their passions, I would appreciate your informing them of this new project.

Recall last year I made a few noises about building a network of science blog networks. The offer at the time was to collaborate/teach science bloggers how to set up their own low cost, low maintenance science blog networks using the Field of Science model. While I didn't have any takers at the time, I still believe in the concept. By way of example, TelescopeFeed will be one of these like science blog networks. And that offer, in a new form, is also back. If you, or someone you know, would be well served to start (or convert) your/their own science blog network to that of the Field of Science kind, get in contact with me at your soonest. Assuming we are of like mind, I'll do everything from handle the tech and design side of your operation (leaving you to recruit and edit) to train you in how to manage and maintain your network from the ground up.

Field of Science Now Taking Applications

2010-12-28T10:46:00.000-08:00

Field of Science has come a good distance in its leisurely two years. In keeping with that pace, I thought I'd finally get around to opening up the floodgates to all the newly uninspired science bloggers out there who maybe thought once or twice about joining a network, but ultimately couldn't be bothered.

Field of Science lacks a grand manifesto/mind numbing contract/long winded code of conduct. We're also without a marketing department, a revenue stream, an editorial hierarchy, or corrupting force of any sort as far as I'm aware. In fact, if you look closely, you'll discover that the network itself is more or less just an allusion craftily assembled in order to give the appearance of some sort of official looking structure from which we propel our blog posts from the homely state of obscurity to the lofty realms of authoritative infallibility--which, as everyone knows, is the key to successful science blogging.

Anyway, Field of Science is the new-old science blog unnetwork-anticollective. Which is to say, I just finished a redesign in which I attempt to maximize the Bloggers ability to individualize their blog while still maintaining just enough of the sameness that gives a network its mojo. Having succeeded in spectacular fashion, I must now document just how wonderful and perfect in every way Field of Science has become with a blog post.

With that done, the only thing left to do is go on and on about how easy and hassle free it is to join Field of Science. It is.

Wrapping up, Field of Science has become the undemanding-cutting-edge science blog network you didn't know you were waiting for. Do have a look around, and do drop me a note if you like what you see.

Census of the Science Blogosphere - Update

2010-10-04T14:30:00.000-07:00

While the Census of the Science Blogosphere 2000 to 2010 has only been up for a week, the pace of new entries has slowed to zero, with a total of 112 participants to date. Not a great showing.

Nevertheless, it's not like there's a deadline or some other arbitrary finish date. Therefore, if you happen upon the Census and haven't participated, please do. I'll continue to collect data all the way up until this time next year (October 2011), when I'll post another survey for the year 2011 to combine with this one.

Links:

The Survey: https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?formkey=dEdFM1hxdzBfMERqNkE1clhZNEtCOUE6MQ

Early Results: https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AkEYSGrudhmJdGt2cHVsdE9hbW9PTG1CbkFxeFNJMGc&hl=en&authkey=CMLNupMH

Oh, and pass it on.

Census of the Science Blogosphere 2000 to 2010

2010-09-28T14:52:00.000-07:00

Looking at the recent network centric attempts at visualizing the science blogosphere, I've been inspired to create a bubble motion chart of science blogs for the last decade. The chart will analyze/visualize Location (i.e. blogger, wordpress, scienceblogs.com, etc.), Type (network, independent, etc.), Gender and Anonymity over the last decade.

To participate, complete the following survey. The survey is divided into years, so if you only started blogging this year, simply scroll down to 2010 and complete that year's information only. Alternatively, if you've been blogging the entire decade, complete each section for each year you've been blogging.

Confidentiality: At the end of the survey I ask for your current URL. I'll use this information to clean-up the data set and drill down in those cases where your blogging arrangement is a unique Type (i.e. Group Blogs, etc.), but I will not publish it. I will, however, make the raw data minus the URL submissions publicly available so others will have an opportunity to use it in their own analyses. Again, your URL will not be published.

Questions Help:

- Platform/Independent/Network/Group Blog - I have limited the presets to what I presume will be the top 7 responses in this category. The presets are not meant to be all encompassing. Please utilize the "Other" option to designate your blogging platform, network or group if not already listed. (Note: This question refers to "location" and not "software" so if you're blogging at Wordpress (i.e. http://sciencetrio.wordpress.com/) then select Wordpress, if your blog is powered by Wordpress but you are publishing on your own domain name (i.e. http://blog.coturnix.org/) select Own Domain.

- XX or XY - Complete only the section that applies, leaving the other blank.

- Byline - Only check Pseudonym if you blog(ged) anonymously, and only for those years when that was the case. If/When you've not blogged under a pseudonym, leave blank.

- Current URL - Please enter your blog's full web address (http://...). This information will be kept confidential/never published.

~~9/29~~ 10/4 Update: To further illustrate the hoped for outcome, I've created a down and dirty motion chart using the data from the first 66 112 responses. Be sure to play around with the many controls to get a sense of the full potential.

Loading...

Notes: We can reuse this data again and again in the coming years by combining it with data from future surveys (2011, 2012, 2013…) and so on and so forth going forward, making this an annual census of science blogs.

Help Wanted

2010-09-24T15:27:00.000-07:00

With the recent growth of Field of Science, an ongoing redesign effort, life getting in the way and the sudden crowding of the science blog networks, I've run up against a couple of areas of need in the operations of FoS that warrant more attention than I have time to spare, and which would most benefit from a set of talents and skills that I simply don't possess. To that end, I'd like to offer up a few speculative job titles should an interested party decide they'd like to carve out a contributing role for themselves here at Field of Science.

Editor-at-Large (Publicist/Social Networker/Advocate) - Mention or inclusion of Field of Science has been noticeably lacking from a number of recent meta science blog network discussions. This pattern of omission--in light of the fact that Field of Science predates the vast majority of science blog networks that are the subjects of these discussions--is of concern. The remedy, aside from shaming the various authors into doing better research, is to devote more time and resources to social networking. That is, personally connecting with the science blogging establishment and ensuring though various means (comments, post, tweets, emails, etc.) that Field of Science is mentioned in the same breath as those other science blog networks.

Art Director (Graphic Designer) - I'm a lot of things, but an artist is not one of them. For starters, as part of the ongoing redesign, finally getting around to properly branding FoS is one of the items on my to do list and I'm desperately out of my depth.

Front Page Editor - The "Featured Content" (blog) component of the Field of Science homepage is a great tool for giving the network's best content at little extra face time. There's an art to doing this job well. I'm failing miserably.

I offer these positions up as speculative job titles because Field of Science is first and foremost a collaboration. That means it's up to each individual to define their role and level of participation and commitment. Perhaps you feel like tackling both those editorial positions above, or the issues facing Field of Science you're interested in fixing aren't on my wish list. No matter, it's up to you to devise a role that's worth doing because you do it so well.

I toyed with the idea of presenting this request in terms of a limited number of internships. But for the caliber of people I'm interested in working with that would be both transparent, and not a little insulting to your intelligence. Nevertheless, these are unpaid positions. You'll get a FoS blog, my eternal gratitude as well as that of the FoS Bloggers, but beyond that, it will be entirely up to you to find satisfaction in the work itself, and who knows, perhaps the (learning) experience will pad your resume in all the right places come time to apply for that paying gig.

Contact.

Build Your Own Science Blog Network

2010-08-12T15:38:00.000-07:00

No, really, build your own science blog network.

The merits of being on a network are many (community, traffic, search ranking, etc.), but the one that matters the most is the prestige a blogger gains by association with the other bloggers in the network and through being part of a professional organization. The reason for this is straightforward--the first impressions a blogger makes are largely built on split-second judgments, and among the things that can be judged the quickest are appearances and the company you keep. If you're part of a professional looking network that includes another blogger who a reader already judges favorably, you're ahead of the game even before the reader reads word one. That doesn't mean you don't need to still be a good/great blogger to have an impact, you do, but being part of a network is a foot in the door every single day of the year. All you have left to do is raise your game to take advantage of the privileged position being part of a network grants you. It is this privileged position, this perpetual foot in the door (not traffic, pagerank or friends) that the ScienceBlogs.com blog network is looking for ways to monetize. It is the future prospect of guilt-by-association (there's that word again) such a compromise entails that helped to spur so many bloggers to leave SB. No matter how you cut it, #SbFail is proof that the network effect is real and that it matters.

When I first started Field of Science I was pleasantly surprised to find that science bloggers were blazing their own trail. They'd resisted, for the most part, the urge to indulge in the sensationalism and rhetorical excess that was fueling and defining the rest of the blogosphere. This intrinsic resistance to short-term gain in blogging has much to do with the scientific method and uniqueness of the people drawn to science in the first place. But I would go further still and suggest that SB deserves some of the credit as well. It gave science bloggers something to aspire to. A reason, beyond simple adherence to an unwritten ethic, to blog credibly, consistently, for the long-term. But now that SB has been, how should I put this, unmasked, does it still play that role? If you'd argue that it does, has the example it is setting changed at all as a consequence? Has the type of science blogger SB is encouraging (seeking) shifted away from those that value the science and good opinion of their peers toward those that are equally or primarily interested in making money? So long as SB remains the best option (or chief steppingstone) for science bloggers hoping to achieve success in blogging (however they define it), SB is going to have an inordinate influence on how science bloggers define science blogging.

The benefits of being on a network are not in dispute. There's also room (and arguably an imperative) for alternatives to SB to emerge. It's all that other stuff, the endemic issues inherent in the network model, and the stuff that being on a network puts out of your control that still stand in the way. If only there was a way to create your own science blog network. One where you, the science bloggers, could be in control of who was on it. One you could afford to host. One where the technology behind it was both powerful enough to compete with the big boys while simple enough for you to manage it in passing. One that was no more demanding than the blogging it is meant to augment.

If only, instead of being forced to beg and plead for fish, there was a way to learn to fish. Well, there is.

You can create your own science blog network, putting you in complete control, for under $12 a year. Your network will be hosted and powered by Google, who, at no cost to you, will employ a crack team of super talented technology professionals to not only keep your network up and running, but to bring you regular innovations. What's more, because you're partnered with Google, your SEO will be the envy of the competition by default, and you can take for granted the innate integration with Google's ever growing list of tools...

Over the next few months I will teach a course on how to create your own science blog network. The total cost to take the course will be under $12, and that will be to pay for your network's first year of hosting. Whether you want to create a science blog network to rival SB, or you have an idea for a small exclusive network for you and your colleagues, or you want to leave the door open to the possibilities, it's up to you. The goal is not to tell you what to do, it's to show you how easy it is to do it. It's to empower you, the scientist blogger, so that you don't have to compromise, or be subject to someone else's whims, shortcomings or worse.

If that sounds like time well spent to you, class is in session: ~~Science Blog Networks 101~~.

Edit: 08/12/10 - Class cancelled due to lack of enrollment. However, I'd still like to explore collaborations along the above lines, so if you're late or decide later that you're interested, leave a comment or email me.

Defining Science Blogging

2010-08-02T20:20:00.000-07:00

The Virginia Heffernan piece in the NYT Magazine about science blogs (link not necessary for the few people reading this post) has gotten a lot of traction thanks to science bloggers. The reason for this is it represented the opinion of a popular writer printed in a mass media publication, and so responding to it holds the promise of traffic. It also helps that Ms. Heffernan's opinions were not above reproach, giving critics and targets of the piece something to sink their teeth into. However, take that same article and post it word-for-word anonymously on some unknown blog and the reaction it would garner from the science blogging community would be...crickets. Why? Because on its own, Heffernan's article about science blogs is neither insightful, compelling or correct. So not only would it not inspire a response (assuming anyone would bother to read it in its entirety), it would not warrant a correction--were it posted by a nobody on a nowhere site. For this reason I take a dim view of the science bloggers validating Heffernan's opinions with a response. It's insulting to their core audience and it's not science blogging. Science blogging would sooner shine a light on a nobody on a nowhere site who says something of substance than pretend a know-nothing managed to light the science blogosphere on fire in spite of the fact that she was wrong about everything--all in trade for a few extra hits.

So there, I said it. In science blogging, blogging is second to science (read: substance).