Brian Cox and Neil deGrasse Tyson’s compelling exploration of what science communication is, drawing on interesting similarities and contrasts between the UK and the US.
“In the UK, we have the BBC – a public serviced broadcaster, in the purest sense of the word – and its mission is to engage and bring people into diversity programming…. What worries me in the US is that when you have multiple channels (such as The Science Channel ) and those channels are “specialist”, you’re in great danger of ghettoising the audience, and you end up preaching to the converted rather that drawing in new people in and introducing them to ideas…” Brian Cox
“I’d like to think that what science communication might be going forward – would include more of a direct statement of relevance to how we live our lives, to the role that science plays in politics, to the survival of our species…” Neil deGrasse Tyson
“Using YouTube to connect people who do science, with people who want to learn about science.
YouTube is one of the most effective platforms around for communicating about and learning about science. Yet remarkably, given the number of YouTube users out there with a taste for science, there are surprisingly few scientists making videos.
To us, this presented a no-brainer opportunity to use YouTube as a way of connecting researchers who are passionate about their science, with viewers who are equally passionate about watching videos about it.
And so we created Science Showcase.
By PBS NewsHour on YouTube
“More and more, people don’t care about expert views. That’s according to Tom Nichols, author of “The Death of Expertise,” who says Americans have become insufferable know-it-alls, locked in constant conflict and debate with others over topics they actually know almost nothing about. Nichols shares his humble opinion on how we got here.”
From The Agenda with Steve Paikin.
“Long before the term “fake news” made its way into headlines and presidential Twitter accounts, scientists have been trying to figure out the best way to battle back against distrust of experts. Timothy Caulfield, author of “Is Gwyneth Paltrow Wrong About Everything?: When Celebrity Culture and Science Clash,” joins The Agenda to discuss science communication and why he believes doubling down on science is the answer in a time of alternative facts.”
This video, by Neuro Transmissions, does an excellent job explaining exactly what we get from federal funding for the National Institutes of Health.
“President Trump’s proposed budget will cut $7 billion in NIH funding – over 20% of the total NIH budget. You might be wondering, where does that NIH money get spent? This week, we interviewed some University of California – San Diego neuroscientists to tell you about their NIH-funded research and how it impacts society.”