The science news cycle – ctd.

I previously posted a comic that hits the science news cycle spot on.  Martin Robbins ups the ante by providing the Rosetta Stone for all articles on research.  Here’s my favorite bit (strikethrough is his):

In this paragraph I will state in which journal the research will be published. I won’t provide a link because either a) the concept of adding links to web pages is alien to the editors, b) I can’t be bothered, or c) the journal inexplicably set the embargo on the press release to expire before the paper was actually published.

“Basically, this is a brief soundbite,” the scientist will say, from a department and university that I will give brief credit to. “The existing science is a bit dodgy, whereas my conclusion seems bang on,” she or he will continue.

I will then briefly state how many years the scientist spent leading the study, to reinforce the fact that this is a serious study and worthy of being published by the BBC the website.

Can I just say how much the lack of links ticks me off nearly every single time?  I’ve wasted so many hours trying to track down original articles referenced in posts.

Another awesome thing about Robbins’ piece is his example of the graphic they choose for these articles:

At this point I will include a picture, because our search engine optimisation experts have determined that humans are incapable of reading more than 400 words without one.

This is a picture

This picture has been optimised by SEO experts to appeal to our key target demographics

I actually laughed out loud, because this picture has obviously been designed by a team of experts to appeal perfectly to my three children.  It contains (1) space, (2) a dinosaur, and (3) rainbow colors.  All three would squeal on seeing this.

Read the whole thing.  It’s worth your time.

Share on twitter
Share on facebook
Share on linkedin
Share on reddit
Share on email

Hidden information below

Subscribe

* indicates required
Email Format