Oh no...
Is blogs really science journalism? Maybe not, but the science news I get, I mainly get from great blogs, so even if it isn't "proper" science journalism, I think I can say that it is where at least some scientists get their news.
So it is a bit strange when a press officer doesn't want to talk to bloggers.
- Would you tell a blogger, "I think this is all you need for a blog?"
- In defence of science blogs (yet again)
I know that I would absolutely love to have my research mentioned by Ed Young -- I've been reading his Not Exactly Rocket Science for years -- so if a press officer at AU didn't give him all the information he wanted, I'd be rather miffed.
February 17th, 2011 at 5:19 pm
Well, at one level, I do understand the press officer not thinking "a blog" was worth his time if it were just some random blog. The issue is more the fact that "Not Exactly Rocket Science" is not just some random blog.
I'm currently reading a book about the history of the Disney corporation and an anecdote there kind of reminds me of this clueless -- apparently, after the success of Disneyland in California, Walt Disney realized that it would be a good idea to have a second park on the East Coast, which obviously turned out to be Disney World in Orlando. But Orlando wasn't his first choice. But the owners of the original site didn't want to talk to him, claiming that they didn't see the point in doing business with "Carnival people".
February 17th, 2011 at 5:24 pm
He he, yes, "carnival people" :)
I agree about not necessarily spending too much time on "just a blog", but I think the same goes for "just a newspaper" -- some science journalism in printed media are not worth that much (I can tell you some stories from recent experience, but I'd rather not).
The question isn't so much about blog versus newspaper, but about quality, and dismissing someone because it is "just a blog", especially when it is of the quality we are talking about here, just shows that the google-fu isn't strong enough with this particular guy...