Should I Even Be Blogging This?
From BBC News: “Are green blogs are helping raise environmental awareness or just confusing matters?”
There are already nearly 12 million weblogs in existence and it is estimated that this number is doubling every five months. However, despite the growing popularity of blogs they are still viewed with considerable suspicion by both scientists and the general public.
A recent international survey of public trust in the media, conducted for the BBC and Reuters, found that internet blogs were the least trusted source of news information, with one in two people unable to say if they trusted them.
The public are right to be cautious. Misrepresentation of environmental science on the internet is widespread and weblogs are by no means a special case. From deforestation rates in the Amazon to climate change statistics, nothing is necessarily how it appears.
Furthermore, unlike most traditional forms of media that have gatekeepers, people whose job it is validate facts, check copy, exert some sort of quality control; the defining characteristic of the blogosphere is its lack of regulation.
Inspire or conspire?
Misreporting and misrepresentation are important because they can lead to a loss of trust at a time when public support for pro-environmental policies is most crucial.
Poor reporting of environmental science may also have a disproportionate effect on children who are increasingly turning the internet as their preferred source of information and who are least able to judge the validity of claims or the legitimacy of one blog over another.
So how should we be responding to the challenges and opportunities presented by the blogosphere?
As both a scientist and journalist by training, I do make it a point to check in with myriad sources before presenting certain facts or statistics. Honestly, not a post goes by when I don’t ask myself, “Self, are you sure about this or are you spewing more crap than a overfed cow on laxatives?” (Okay, maybe now and then the question shifts to “Self, you work so hard. How’s about rewarding yourself with a cupcake or two?” and then “Where can I get cupcakes around here?”)
Regardless, I’d be interested in hearing what you guys think.
Cara said,
June 23, 2006 at 4:50 pm
Keep on keepin’ on!
Erica said,
June 23, 2006 at 5:35 pm
I have your site saved under my “daily” category in del.icio.us so that I remember to check it at least once a day. I never take anyone’s word as gospel, but I enjoy your writing style as well as the personal touch of most of your posts.
It is one thing to read a blog that talks about enviromentally-conscious living, but it is something different to read about a person who is making changes to their life based on environmental concerns. Plus, I love to read blogs of fellow knitters! Keep up the good work.
Otterman said,
June 23, 2006 at 8:22 pm
I entertain the same thoughts about the mainstream media. Information is widely available and we just have to learn how to find the facts within it all. It’s a skill we have always needed to acquire, even in the days of one-library towns.
meranie said,
June 24, 2006 at 8:53 am
What I really like about your blog is that you ARE scientific and specific and cause me to think about how I can make a difference. And how many people read your site without commenting? And how many people are being affected (positively) by your work?
I think what you do is great, and I enjoy reading what you have to write, and I don’t feel guilty for being voyeuristic as I feel this is just as valid as reading a book, only yours is more modern and updated daily. =)
In other words, HEART!
Liz said,
June 24, 2006 at 10:08 am
I also think the public are right be “cautious” about mainstream media. There is so much that is under-reported or mis-reported that it makes sense for people to seek out alternatives. I always do my own research about something I read online… just to make sure.
You’re doing great!
Ani said,
June 24, 2006 at 10:34 am
I don’t believe everything I read, blog or mainstream new source.
I truly enjoy your blog. It’s given me much food for thought and I’m making baby steps toward making my life a greener place. Keep up your inspiring work! You deserve a cupcake!
Rachel said,
June 26, 2006 at 8:00 am
First of all, I think this is a question of which came first — the distrust or the misrepresentation of facts. And it further begs the question — who started distorting facts? We live in a culture of distrust because this is what has been created by pervasive and dishonest advertising methods, corrupt politicians, despicable corporate practices and policies and an endless stream of, well, lies. Of course we are skeptical of blogs. We are skeptical of everything!
For the number of reports and articles out there decrying the blog, it seems to me that there are a lot of “gatekeeping” news organizations and journalists behind them who are shaking in their shoes about the freedom with which information is able to travel. And while I do realize that this means ridiculous and untrue information is able to spread that quickly as well, the suggestion that information should be controlled by a select few smacks a bit of elitism, eh? And lets not forget that these news outlets are, underneath it all, owned by big multimedia conglomerates which are working for the interests of their myriad of companies — yeah, I’m a little cynical. Sorry about that :(
This article mentions sloppy science, but sentences like: “with one and two people unable to say that they trust them.” Unable to say? Is this a euphemism for flat out don’t trust? Or is it just people saying, I don’t know, I would have to find out which blog it is and see how I feel about the source? This is the kind of fact distortion they seem to be warning that bloggers are regularly practicing.
So, to make a long story short (too late!), please keep blogging. You are rocking my world.