January 26, 2012

Blogging Science While Female - the Storify

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

Whew. What a crazy week! Just 7 days ago, I hopped on a plane and began my long journey eastward to North Carolina to attend Science Online 2012. In case you aren't familiar with the conference, Science Online is, as Christopher Mims said, like "a Burning Man for Science Journalists." For me, this meant three days straight of talking, learning, and networking - note the absence of the word "sleeping." Last night was the first time in a week I got more than 5 hours sleep. It was amazing.

Anyhow, I was at Science Online not only to engage with other scientists and journalists, but also to co-moderate a session titled "Blogging Science While Female." Here's the session description:

The session on women in science blogging at Science Online 2011 sparked internet-wide discussion about sexism, discrimination and gender representation in science and science blogging. Now here we are, a year later. How have we, as a community, faced the issues brought up by last year's discussion? What has changed? What have we learned, and what challenges still lie ahead? Moderators and attendees will assess the current state of women in the science blogosphere and discuss the best way we can support and encourage gender representation in science blogging.

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.

Rather than rehash the session here, I'll instead give you Tanya Lewis' storify of the session (below). Also, be sure to read Kate Clancy's epically awesome post: Blogging While Female, and Why We Need A Posse

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American