Commenting threads: good, bad, or not at all. by Bora Zivkovic | January 28, 2013
Science, New Media, and the Public by Dominique Brossard and Dietram A. Scheufele | January 4, 2013
This Story Stinks by DOMINIQUE BROSSARD and DIETRAM A. SCHEUFELE | March 2, 2013
The bottom half of the internet: The counter-attack to the war on online comments by Hannah R Waldram | February 23, 2013
On the 8th of July, my article on Research policy in Greece was published in ResearchEurope.
Why is there reaction to science-related issues in some countries, and in others not so much?
Having lived for almost a decade in a country where there were big reactions to science issues (MMR, GM, mad cow, etc), and having moved back to a country where the reactions are not so big – one could say non-existent – it makes me wonder why is this the case?
Of course it comes down to society, but why? What I mean is, of course there are big differences between the British and Greek societies, but which of these differences cause reaction in the former and not in the latter?
This question has been brewing in my mind for quite sometime now since it is different to communicate science to a society that is against it, than to a society that simply does not care. (A related question: why it does not care?)
[This is an article I wrote for a major Greek newspaper “VIΜΑ” which was published on the 5th of February 2010. There is going to be a small Greek twist to this blog as well. First the article – loosely translated by me – in English and then the original in Greek.]
In just one decade in the science of biology three “new” areas were “created”. In 2000 everyone thought that Bioinformatics is the future of biology. After the final sequence of the human genome, three years later, everyone was talking about Systems biology.Today, at the end of this decade, the focus is Synthetic Biology. It is therefore perfectly reasonable to wonder if these areas are indeed new, if a new paradigm is being created. Is the science of biology changing with with unprecedented high rates or do scientists give to their research the newest, and therefore most attractive name in order to increase their opportunities of getting funding?