Framing science – a debate

| 0 Comments | 2 TrackBacks | View blog reactions

In early April Matt Nisbet and Chris Mooney published a policy forum piece in Science entitled “Framing science”, causing quite a furor in the blogosphere. The debate how now reached the pages of Science in the form of a series of letters to the editor, including a response from Nisbet and Mooney. As I made clear in posts at the time (here and here), I think Nisbet and Mooney are onto something really important: “when applied responsibly and ethically, framing can be a valuable tool for scientists in engaging nontraditional audiences.”

Links

  • At Science, Four Letters on Framing and Our Reply – Framing Science
  • Framing the debate about science communication around false dichotomies – nanopublic
  • “Framing Science” Letters Exchange in Science (Complete With Matt Nisbet Avatar Pic) – The Intersection

2 TrackBacks

TrackBack URL: http://darwin.eeb.uconn.edu/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1497

John Wilkins is tired of the anti-evolutionists: When I got into this game about 15 years or more ago, I thought that if we just argued and presented information about what evolution really is, and what it means for modern... Read More

Celeste Condit, distinguished research professor in the Department of Speech Communication at the University of Georgia, has an article in the latest Nature Reviews Genetics that is well worth reading: How geneticists can help reporters to get their st... Read More

Leave a comment

 Subscribe in a reader

Recent Entries

A swine flu survey
Carl Zimmer points to a study on swine flu psychology that needs participants.As you have heard in the news, there…
Suppressing evidence
From Andy Revkin a few days ago.For more than a decade the Global Climate Coalition, a group representing industries with…
Who does climate change hurt?
From the Center for Climate Change Communication at George Mason University Based on a nationally representative survey of 2,164 American…
Nature Blog Network View blog authority