For a couple of years, I’ve had the domain CitizenJournalist.US and I recently re-acquired CitizenJournalist.TV.
These two names are strong names with potential for a number of different kinds of projects. I’ve been sharing possible joint projects and sales with a number of people. It occurs to me that I could pose the “what would you do?” question here and see what thoughts others have.
There is a mock up at www.CitizenJournalist.US if you are interested in exploring graphic ideas. The design at the site is a WordPress theme that is one of hundreds of examples of internet news delivery. The photos are creative commons from Flickr.
The potential exists for these names to be content driven site — education driven sites — certification and credential driven sites — even sales sites for gear and tools and toys.
The third story in the series from the New York Times.
Brain Power The Gut Feeling
For all that scientists have studied it, the brain remains the most complex and mysterious human organ — and, now, the focus of billions of dollars’ worth of research to penetrate its secrets.
This is the third article in a series that is looking in depth at some of the insights these projects are producing
This is a great story that shows the potential for understanding how we use our brains:
Everyone has hunches — about friends’ motives, about the stock market, about when to fold a hand of poker and when to hold it. But United States troops are now at the center of a large effort to understand how it is that in a life-or-death situation, some people’s brains can sense danger and act on it well before others’ do.
Experience matters, of course: if you have seen something before, you are more likely to anticipate it the next time. And yet, recent research suggests that something else is at work, too.
Small differences in how the brain processes images, how well it reads emotions and how it manages surges in stress hormones help explain why some people sense imminent danger before most others do.
Brain Power – In Battle, Hunches Prove to Be Valuable Assets – Series – NYTimes.com.
From Mike Dover at Wikinomics blog:
A lot of people run into these etiquette errors as they are getting used to a new social network. I have a presentation that I’ve delivered several times (often for fifty bucks and bus fare) where I describe LinkedIn as a Grey Flannel Suit and Facebook as a Hawaiian Shirt. It’s good to have both in your wardrobe, but if you show up at a board meeting in a Hawaiian Shirt you look like a goof and if you show up on a boathouse roof in a Grey Flannel Suit you look like an ass.
via Wikinomics» Blog Archive » Grey Flannel Suit vs. the Hawaiian Shirt.
The article in the Christian Science Monitor sets up the story, the headline and tag line read:
Scientists and the public often don’t see eye to eye
Most people view scientists favorably, but the lack of scientific knowledge on controversial issues can impact policy decisions.
The Monitor’s article highlights a study by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and the Pew Research Center.
Organizations like the AAAS are trying to encourage scientists to do a better job of communicating what they do to the general public. It’s a notion that seems to be resonating with many younger scientists, Dr. Leshner and other say, although it’s still tough to do while trying to teach, conduct research, and hunt for the grant money that will pay for the research.
As readers of this blog know, I live in the academic world. Everyone in academic has their strength a dn key skill sets. Just as I would be out of my strenghts in most clinical research labs, many of the scientist-academic-researchers I work with are lost in the world of telling their story to the public. I read grant proposals often with gritted teeth and rolling eyes and I struggle through their prose. While it is often successful at attracting grant dollars (which is the point after all) its the kind of stuff that makes any Microsoft user manual seem like a cliff hanger.
It’s a double edged sword, like any professional development. On the one edge, successful researchers feel “if its not broken, why fix it?” It the grant dollars are coming in, the scholarly papers are being written (for a shrinking audience of peer reviewers and the rank, promotion, and tenure committee) then why change?
On the other edge of the sword, as the study points out, public policy is being made without the benefit of their scholarly knowledge, which is a huge global loss.
The AAAS web site shares this insight:
As the 40th anniversary of the moon landing approaches, just 17% say U.S. scientific achievements rate as the best in the world, compared with nearly half (49%) of scientists who hold that view.
The article wraps up with this
“A very small percentage of Americans know a scientist personally,” he explains. “Scientists are just not on their radar.”
To change that, “scientists need to reach out to America,” he continues. Personal contact may not change an individual’s worldview, Mr. Mooney suggests, but it does have the potential to demystify scientists and the way they approach their world more than huddling in a lab would.
