🙃 I just spent 15 minutes writing to the editors of a major science news hub about their presentation of evolutionary theory. This is a bugbear of mine - evolution is *so* poorly reported on, and plays right into a lot of cultural ignorance - but...
I also realized I'm grouchy because the world's awfulness has kept me from writing more on scientific literacy in general.
Too much "politicians not listening to science" and "humans being shitty" as of late. Not enough wonder in the cosmos itself.
@MLClark Right there with ya on "grouchy." I'm watching a March 2010 "space forum" here in Brevard County where a certain politician lied over and over about Obama and NASA. I'm calling him out in my book for his lies that whipped up the locals, but I'm trying to be objective and not "grouchy."
OTOH ... He deserves "grouchy." 😤
From the sounds of it, objective grounds for grouch-itude exist!
(This is also why we edit - because our first draft is probably going to be our most furious!)
@MLClark Yeah, we have to be our own editors. I've taken out more than a few adjectives and adverbs that could be construed as opinion.
OTOH, I think it's fair to argue that the publisher and the reader expect our opinion. I reserve that for the conclusion at the end of each chapter. By that point, I think I've laid out my evidence to justify my conclusion.
The good thing is that I'm near the book's end and so far haven't found anything to contradict my basic thesis.
This, for instance, is the kind of explainer I enjoy being able to take my time with: a piece in February that explained why "dark energy" is a misnomer, and reflected on how the terms we use when reporting on science can massively impact broader understanding of key concepts in our cosmos.
I've also tackled the dangers of medical news reporting, and of course biology, but anything related to cosmology has my heart above all else.
Gotta lean into joy again soon!
https://onlysky.media/mclark/early-black-holes-simplify-the-question-of-dark-energy/