Perigee moons, and other Twitter musings--Follow us!

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


ScientificAmerican.com—in the form of the author of this blog post—had a great experience this weekend. Despite the fact that it was cloudy and snowing heavily much of Saturday night in western Massachusetts, we got to see this month’s perigee moon, the largest and brightest of 2009.

How?

Twitter.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Here’s what happened: A Facebook friend reminded us of the perigee full moon. Then Digg science pointed us at NASA’s posting about it. So we wrote a blog post, only to realize that much of the northeastern U.S. would be snowed in like we were, and wouldn’t be able to see the gorgeous moon.

That’s where Twitter came in. We sent out a tweet asking SciAm.com’s followers to send us links to their photos. They did, so we combined those with links our online commenters sent, and others we found at search.twitter.com, and by late Saturday night, there were links to more than a dozen great photos of the moon. All we and others in the Northeast needed to see the perigee was a decent Internet connection.

The perigee moon anecdote is just one example of the ways in which we’ll be using Twitter here at Scientific American.com. We recently got serious about our Twitter account, by actively monitoring it and beginning to follow people. In the words of one of our followers, there’s now a “human” behind it. Last week, for instance, tech reporter Larry Greenemeier tweeted updates from the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. And we’ve found story ideas by the score. This salmonella oubreak update, for example, was a tip from mary_siceloff, the one who made the comment about a human.

So please follow us on Twitter, so we can have a conversation. For those of you who are asking, “What is Twitter?”, Wikipedia's entry is pretty good and defines it as "free social networking and microblogging service that allows its users to send and read other users' updates (otherwise known as tweets), which are text-based posts of up to 140 characters in length." Or better yet, just to go www.twitter.com and try it out, which is how we came to understand what it was. Here’s Twitter’s Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) page, and here’s their help page, with lots of tips.

For those of you who are asking “What took you so long?”, well, we’re there now, so please forgive us. Either way, go to http://twitter.com/sciam to follow us.

Twitter is just one more way that you can engage with the humans behind SciAm.com. You can of course e-mail us—our addresses are right on that link. Better yet, you can leave comments on a story, so everyone who views that story can see your thoughts.

And now you can Twitter, too. We will do our best to respond to all the @replies sent our way. What we’d love more of: ideas for stories. Links to great coverage elsewhere. Feedback on stories, including suggestions for corrections. (Note: We will respond and have a careful look, but just because we don’t make every change you ask for doesn’t mean we’re ignoring you. Sometimes there are lots of sides to a particular story, and we can’t delete the ones you don’t agree with. We’re a news organization, after all.).

See you on Twitter!

Ivan Oransky is editor in chief of Spectrum and a distinguished writer in residence at New York University's Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute. He is a co-founder of Retraction Watch and a volunteer member of the board of directors of the PubPeer Foundation.

More by Ivan Oransky

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe