Labs

But before I get to the good stuff--new science bloggers--humor me while I digress and scratch the itch (read: kernel of truth) in the above joke. About this time a year ago Bora left ScienceBlogs. In a post we're all familiar with, Bora speculated about the nature of science blog networks and their future. In that post, he mentions the other science blog networks including Field of Science . Networks he does not mention in that post dated July 19, 2010 include: Wired, Scientopia, Guardian, PLoS, SciAm [1] . Why did Bora omit these science blog networks? Because, at that time, they didn't exist. In the year since PepsiGate the aformentioned nonexistent science blog networks were born. In response to each "birth" the science blogosphere has found a reason or two to navel gaze and congradulate one another ... Inevitably, these meta science blogging posts inspire comparisons and/or lists: of science blog networks . But if you were to use those posts to gener...

No, really, build your own science blog network. The merits of being on a network are many (community, traffic, search ranking, etc.), but the one that matters the most is the prestige a blogger gains by association with the other bloggers in the network and through being part of a professional organization. The reason for this is straightforward--the first impressions a blogger makes are largely built on split-second judgments, and among the things that can be judged the quickest are appearances and the company you keep . If you're part of a professional looking network that includes another blogger who a reader already judges favorably, you're ahead of the game even before the reader reads word one. That doesn't mean you don't need to still be a good/great blogger to have an impact, you do, but being part of a network is a foot in the door every single day of the year. All you have left to do is raise your game to take advantage of the privileged position being par...