Skip to main content

A Way Forward

For obvious reasons--I'm building a science blog network here--I've been paying close attention to the Diaspora. It is always fascinating to find out what a place looks like from the inside, and there's been a lot of that type of reflection going on. Then there's the teaching moment, the learning from SB's mistakes, but to be honest, the mistakes they've made (and are making) are pretty basic--so there's not a lot to take note of other than to marvel at how the thing managed to survive as long as it has. Finally, there's the prospect of picking up some of SB's talent. I admit, I've been circling the devastation not unlike a vulture, and I've even made a few inquiries and posted a few strategic comments around the fringes in an effort to at least get the word out to departing SBers that there is an alternative science blog network out there. One that doesn't suffer from a lack of vision or the corrupting influence of a financial motive/burden...

But this post isn't the open invitation to departing SBers to join FoS that you might expect. This post is a response of sorts to Bora's epic farewell. If you haven't read it, do so now.

If I told you that Bora echoes some of the themes I've been talking about for years would you believe me? What if I provided you with links? Or witnesses? Well, I will, upon request. However, the point of bringing up my history is not to say I'm smarter than Bora, or even as smart as Bora. It is to illustrate that I agree with Bora, not out of convenience or advantage, but because that's my honest assessment of the state of play. SB's disintegration is an opportunity for science blogging to evolve into a more sophisticated, diverse and dynamic species.

To that end, I have a contribution to make. Or rather, a vision to share. costs a little over $11/year to run. That's it. There's no hosting costs, no tech support expense, no staff or other full or part-time paid position. FoS is hosted by Google, who can handle all the traffic we can send their way without breaking a sweat. FoS is powered by, which is owned by Google, and if you know anything about the Internet, then the fact that our blogging software is a property of Google is really all you need to know. And if your opinion of is over a year old, then you don't know The picture I'm painting is this. You don't need a fully staffed media group replete with editors, writers, sales, technical, personnel and accounting departments in order to have a science blog network. All you need is a little vision, a willingness to learn a few simple technical tricks, a passion and a few dollar bills.

If you have those things, you're probably already seriously considering creating your own science blog network or collective with your fellow friends and familiars. If that's you, I would like to propose we create a network of networks. That is to say, I'll share with you the know-how I've gathered in creating and maintaining FoS (no need to reinvent the wheel), and in turn we collaborate to create like science blog networks. The example I have in mind is the Gawker group of blogs which, while each is unique (in theme and content), each shares a like platform and certain navigation elements.

Combining the Gawker model and the FoS model, we have the tools, the template and the technology to create a series of science themed blog networks that, while individual, compliment one another. There could be a science blog network for women scientists, one for science writers, another for the politicization of science, and still another for the infrequent science blogger. The list goes on and on. Just consider all the science carnivals past and present. All those themes could be networks of their own, and each of them a part of a larger, mutually beneficial group of networks.

To me, that would be a bright future for science blogging. One I'm fully prepared to invest heavily in.



  1. What I mean to say, there are lots of opportunities out there and it is time to think outside the box. Let us figure out a new way to get this to a raging start!

  2. Well, I'm a patient sort. If the idea appeals to enough people, then we'll do it, and it will be cool, and professional, and fun, and dynamic, and cutting edge, and collaborative, and the sort of project that people are proud to be a part of, and mostly, it will exceed all our wildest imaginations and expectations, and believe you me, I've got a powerful imagination when it comes to stuff like this.

    If it doesn't appeal to enough people, then today is simply not the day for it. Which is fine. There's no rush and no expiration. But the more I think about it, the more I like the idea. So sooner or later, one way or another, the seed has taken root in my mind.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

If You Build It,...

Field of Science is a science blog network. FoS is so named because Field of Science is a good, practical name for a website about science, but also--thanks to a certain movie--said name evokes illusions that are, more or less, analogous to what FoS is all about . . . FoS is home to bloggers who are doing actual science and whose blogging is clearly informed by their work. If you are a science blogger and your blog is powered by Blogger (or you wouldn't mind switching over to Blogger), and you are interested in joining FoS , complete an application and I'll get back to you as soon as possible. If you want to know more about the nuts, bolts and actuals, watch this presentation .

A New Wave of Science Blogging?

One can imagine science bloggers would be a (the) primary beneficiary in a landscape where Google ranks sites based on the correctness of factual information provided by the [blog] .  What's more, it is not a stretch to conclude that science bloggers could very well be in the vanguard of a new wave of bloggers who earn Google’s trust by blogging within the confines of what is known. The news that Google is working on a system of ranking sites based on the quality of their facts should be greeted by science bloggers everywhere as a game-changer.

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

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?