The prevailing wisdom might be "not much," but Kent Anderson begs to differ. In a post on the Scholarly Kitchen site, Anderson lists 60 functions of the academic press, such as editing: "A subject-matter expert needs to learn how to be a good editor. This comes naturally enough to some, but others struggle with it, and a few never quite get it ... Some editing is cursory and done by outsourced editors with little domain expertise who just apply style guides."
Science writing news
How much impact does a New York Times book review have on book sales? Not as much as you'd think, according to this Publisher's Weekly analysis. The industry trade paper tracked before-and-after sales of six "lower-profile" books featured on the front covers of two May issues of the Sunday book review and "found that the Gray Lady still has influence in the minds of readers, though not nearly on a big enough scale to seriously alter a book’s fortunes."
A new drug appears to halt Alzheimer's disease in its tracks, at least for some patients. Is it a "breakthrough?" Judith Graham says no on the Association of Health Care Journalists' site, and calls out journalists who suggest otherwise: "Especially on a topic like Alzheimer’s, so fraught with emotion and hopelessness, the responsibility for getting it right – not too dewy-eyed, not too jaundiced, carefully balanced and hewing closely to the facts – is a heavy one."
July 31 is the deadline for entering the Victor Cohn Prize for Excellence in Medical Science Reporting.
UPDATED 11:37 7/21/2012, It's FDA Week! But not in a good way. FDA was revealed to have spied extensively on its scientists and also science journalists and politicians. The agency counterpunched by approving high-profile drugs for preventing HIV infection and promoting weight loss and treating myeloma and breast cancer.. It also banned BPA in baby bottles and sippy cups although there is no BPA in baby bottles and sippy cups.
Denise Graveline has a refreshing take on news that the presidential campaigns insist on reviewing their quotes. She shoots down the rationale: "'Denise, don't you find that, 99.9 percent of the time, the reporter has misquoted the expert being interviewed?' No, that's not what I find at all. What I find is that you said something you weren't supposed to say, you were quoted accurately, and now you want to blame the reporter." More from Poynter.
Perry White's days may be numbered, or at least they should be, according to a recent Onion story on the anachronism that has been Clark Kent's smokescreen for about 80 years now. Shouldn't it at least copy other famous but struggling newspapers and put up a paywall? "Frustrated fans of the Superman comic book said Monday the continued financial stability and cultural relevance of the series' Daily Planet newspaper is now the most unrealistic part of its universe."
What's the proper role of science writers? That question was raised at the recent UK Conference of Science Journalists, and in this Guardian post, Chris Chambers and Petroc Sumner comment on the debate: "As scientists we were puzzled by the implication that explaining and exposing are incompatible activities. Journalism as a whole must surely achieve both, just as science should expose flaws in existing theories while also explaining new data."
They may actually be hired guns or well-heeled lobbyists, Melanie Sloan says in a Nieman Reports interview: "On the surface, these people look like legitimate experts. And I think many journalists don't necessarily look at the motivations of their sources. It's obvious when you're talking to a political campaign, but other than that I don't think reporters look closely enough. You have to check the background. What can you find that legitimates their expertise?"