Paul Raeburn: Two years ago, I felt lucky to announce that I had been lured to the Sunshine State by Florida Atlantic University, which offered me a free hand to develop a new master’s program in science writing. Sadly, all has come tumbling down.

Social media may be gaining respect as a book-promotion tool, but authors shouldn't forget that old-style speaking gigs still work, Joel Friedlander writes on The Book Designer: "The X-factor is what you don’t expect: meeting someone in your audience who might order hundreds or thousands of books from you; getting asked to write for the top magazine in your field on the topic of your talk; establishing a peer-to-peer relationship with a top influencer in your field."

Two posts on Elsevier Connect discuss the Oransky/Marcus blog that digs out details on scientific paper retractions. First, Tom Reller advises editors on handling an RW inquiry. Then NASW's David Levine collects thoughts from four science writers, including former USA Today reporter Doug Levy, who says RW is "bringing the scientific community itself more directly into the discussion. That’s a good thing for everyone."

Speaking to your source directly is a tenet of reporting — except when it isn't. When you and your source speak different languages, interpreters intervene. Laura Shin writes on Poynter about finding and using interpreters: Quoting New York Times reporter Barry Bearak, Shin advises, “When you write, tell the reader what language was spoken and that a translator was used ... 'The reader deserves to know that the words have passed through the translation process.'”