I used term to mean trad view of academia in unis and publications, and that we should go beyond that and value social media and outreach
Do you think it's negative? Do you think the lay audience might see it as a blanket statement?
-
-
I do think it's negative, but I also think we as academics can do much more to clarify why basic work is important
-
I think the fact you can get paid upwards of 1k per day for consulting, in *some* sense means we're pretty valued by the invisible hand.

-
But sure. I don't think all scientists are suited to all facets of science, and that's ok. I believe in being inclusive regardless.
-
Yes - and that (to me) is a separate and overlapping point: requiring scientists to be able to think/write/market etc etc is unreasonably
-
*unreasonable
-
"market" interesting choice of word there... I personally don't even think twitter is that far reaching. I say that tho and yet a friend of
-
I agree that twitter doesn't reach that far; talk also discussed writing for scicomm, podcasts, and instagram
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Do you think the lay public thinks scientists are out of touch? Do you think that affects their belief in our findings?
-
This is the super interesting point that I've not considered before. I think non-academics see "us" as arrogant....
-
....which is not quite "out of touch" but I see your point about academics not representing the wider population
-
I see bankers as arrogant.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

