Well, to borrow a phrase from Click and Clack, I've come around for the "third half of the show" - figuring out how to bridge the gap between the growing public desire for accessible, informative, entertaining science content and chemistry's approach to that communication. A lot of terms have swirled around this issue: "punching down," #BogusChem, "Inside Baseball," 'in-reach' not outreach, #chemophobia, and "dumbing down," to name just a few.
|Thanks for the tip about the magnets, Andre!|
(P.S. Yes, I know "D" isn't an element)
Readers: Have a favorite post I haven't included? Send it along in the comments.
Janet Stemwedel, Doing Good Science: "When we target chemophobia, are we punching down?"
Chad Jones, The Collapsed Wavefunction: "Punching down? I don't remember swinging at all."
Ash Jogalekar, The Curious Wavefunction: "Where's the chemistry lobby? On why we need a National Center for Chemical Education."
See Arr Oh, Just Like Cooking: "The Chemistry Popularity Conundrum"
Michelle Francl, Slate: "Don't Take Medical Advice from the NY Times Magazine"; Nature Chemistry: "How to counteract chemophobia";
Paul Bracher, ChemBark: "Combatting Chemophobia"
Rebecca Guenard, Atomic-O-Licious: "Chemistry Isn't Just About Chemicals"
Science 2.0: "Chemophobia - The Unnatural Fixation of Activists"
Chemjobber, Dr. Rubidium, See Arr Oh, Chemjobber: "Chemistry Avengers" (podcast)
Marc Leger, Atoms and Numbers: "Consider the audience when addressing chemophobia"
Chris Clarke, Pharyngula: "Did you know douchebags are full of dihydrogen monoxide?"
Andrew Bissette, Behind NMR Lines: "In defense of #chemophobia"
More to come...