Happy New Year everyone! Early January is always a good time at Nature Network because this is when we usually find out which science bloggers have been chosen by their peers to be included in the annual anthology of the best science blog posts, called Open Laboratory.
And this year, NN bloggers have made a strong showing.
Out of the hundreds of nominations, 50 blog posts were chosen and six were written by Nature Network bloggers!
“I get my kicks from thermodynamicks!”
from Reciprocal Space
by Stephen Curry
“Someone should invent a device to look at the micro world”
by Charles Darwin
“On the hardness of biology”
from The End of the Pier Show
by Henry Gee
“On the nature of networking”
from The Scientist
by Richard Grant
“Poster session paparazzi”
from Nothing’s Shocking
by Noah Gray
“In which science becomes a sport – hypothetically speaking”
from Mind the Gap
by Jennifer Rohn
You can find links to all 52 winners (50 posts, one cartoon and one poem) here.
The editors and winners are busy compiling the posts to be published later this month as a book for purchase on lulu.com.
Congratulations to everyone!
Hooray for alphabetical order! Seriously though, I am honoured to be in such esteemed company.
Actually, 7 made the cut – although my winning post was from my other blog, Observations of a Nerd. Congrats to all!!
Sorry Christie, didn’t mean to leave you out. I was counting posts written originally for Nature Network.
Congratulations, all of you! (Including Christie! =) )
Oh, I understand that :). Just wanted to toot my own horn a bit… it’s the first time I’ll ever be published! :)
Are you quite sure it was me
And not some other bloggy bloke?
(Damn, it’s hard to write in trokes)
There’s at least one other Henry Gee.
Well done all! Especially to Stephen and Henry. Henry who never thought to blog until recently, and Stephen who hates bloggers and blogging!!
:)
Hi Christie
I sympathize: I had an entry in last year’s that was published elsewhere simultaneously as here, but because the link at USyd was in the book I didn’t get to be featured here.
That aside, well done peeps, and a huge shout out to Jenny, whose efforts in this regard make Hercules look like a wuss.
Thanks, Richard, thanks Corrie. For me, one of the biggest thrills will be corresponding personally with Charles Darwin! I do hope he’s not precious about his prose.
Henry:
Trokes may shackle
and make you floppy,
But cut the cackle:
Where’s your copy?
Hear, hear, Richard – hats off to Jenny!
@Ian – thankyaverymuch. Am learning to live with the loathing…!
My copy will be on its way
(Ah! Iambs feel so much better)
Once I’ve addressed the pile of Letters
That authors, in their sportive play
Had sent to Nature just before
We tolled the bell of Christmastide.
The fools, they expect us to decide
Their fate now, sooner or before
The New Year calendar’s rung in.
As if editors, and referees
Did nothing more than aim to please
At any time, their every whim.
(OK, OK, I’ll raise a toast
My copy shall be in the post).
p.s. why was the most recent Futures back to front in the print issue? Too much corporate eggnog?
Congrats to all the Open Laboratory winners … well done!
And thanks to the person who nominated one of my posts.
Though I’m rethinking this blogging thing in 2009. Blogging + me = not particularly compatible.
Congratulations!
That’s some standard to aim for… next year!
Congratulations all!
“Blogging + me = not particularly compatible.”
Why not, Kristi?
Not because you didn’t get in, I hope? =) I’ve never made it in, but this was the first year other people nominated my blog posts, so that was a tiny little milestone. I’m still a terrible writer, though: Often people don’t get that something I wrote was a joke, or think something is a joke when it isn’t really. I need to work on that (but how?) Two posts in which I know that was an issue were nominated, so I suppose they were both misunderstood – although I’m glad the not-a-joke-but-serious one didn’t make it. I might actually have refused if it did get in, and even considered unnominating it (is that even possible? This worried me for a few days), but then realized it wouldn’t make the cut anyway, and it didn’t.
By no means are you a terrible writer, Eva – quite the opposite, in fact. I think joking and humor don’t always translate very well on the internet, whether in comments or posts or messageboards, perhaps because the facial expressions and body language are absent.
I have several reasons to believe that blogging and I aren’t compatible. First, after a year of experimentation, I have to concede that, quite honestly, I don’t enjoy it that much. Writing blog posts is always bit of a struggle for me, and sometimes feels like a chore. In contrast, expressing myself through art journaling, painting, or fiber arts comes easily and naturally. Maybe I should just shut up with the text, and post my visual journal pages. ;-)
Second, a lot of the better posts, by many criteria, seem to be very “meta”. I don’t get “meta”. I have no desire to “meta”-stasize, either.
The last reason might be controversial, or perhaps outside the experience and opinions of most. Let’s just say that some health professional school admissions committees frown upon (i.e. reject) applicants who come across as overly self-involved. If you had a terminal or chronic illness, would you want a selfish, narcissistic a-hole like House as your primary care physician, for example? Blogging can be, in many ways, a self-involved, self-referential, and self-congratulatory activity, and so in my circumstances, it seems more than a little hypocritical.
“Maybe I should just shut up with the text, and post my visual journal pages. ;-) "
Do it! Or, well, post the pictures. Not necessarily the shutting up with the text part. I need more science art things to link to from easternblot.net
Eva, do not blush – we think
Your writing’s truly in the pink.
Kristi, do it. In place of strife
Those med-school types should get a life.
A maxim none too strongly stated:
False modesty is overrated.
Congrats to the winners!!
I was really, really surprised and happy to see three of my posts nominated. Ok, so I nominated one myself because Maxine thought it was good, but I had no idea about the other two – actually even until the winners were announced. Since I just started my blog in October, I didn’t think I’d have anything on the list and didn’t bother looking before… :)
So thanks to whoever nominated my posts!!
Kristi: definitely post the journal pages, especially if they’re about nature observations. I’d love to see that!
I second the support to Kristi and Eva – I really enjoy your additional perspectives, and much as I enjoy reading the more prolific writers would be sorry to lose your contributions. Even if I lurk and do not always comment.
Kristi’s two points about feeling like posting is sometimes a chore, and that the nature of a successful post (in solliciting reactions from a readership) is a little hard to pin down, and therefore not necessarily gratifying for the author, ring true for me. I’ve been at the point of winding down, but with some encouragement have taken up the keyboard once more, if sporadically. Don’t worry if your posts are not too frequent, or are non-verbal – that is why we are not on an e-mail mailing list but using http.
Congratulations all – proving once more that science and good writing can go together!
@Kristi and Eva (and Heather) – I hope you will all keep going with your blogs, whether it be in words or pictures!
It’s true that some very good posts don’t attract a lot of comments, though I imagine they are still rather widely read. For sure it’s nice to get comments because then at least you know someone has been reading but perhaps there is a way of indicating how many times a post has been accessed (Corie? Matt?), which might provide some gratification to the author? We all need to be loved!
Picture blogging sounds great to me – have you thought of something like project365 where you take or perhaps make a picture and post it each day of the year? Of course that is a big commitment but what about project52, one per week?
@Stephen – comments are nice because it is feedback, but writing to inspire comments changes what you write.
Congratulations to the six entries though, and to all those nominated.
why was the most recent Futures back to front in the print issue? Too much corporate eggnog?
Come colleagues, gather round the fire
And hear my stirring tale
Of Christmas pagination,
Interspersed with jugs of ale.
Our Futures pieces hitherto
Took but a single page.
Our Christmas tale would take up two:
A riddle to try a sage.
We knew our readers liked to read
Their stories from the back.
To print the Christmas tale this way
Would make them cry “Alack!”
“The Futures tale starts halfway through!”
To avoid such cries of pain,
We ran the tale back to front,
So tranquility might reign.
have you thought of something like project365 where you take or perhaps make a picture and post it each day of the year?
That’s a great idea, Katherine, though I think the project52 you mentioned is more realistic for me. Sketching or painting little nature pictures is something I find very relaxing.
@ Heather – I think the mysteries of blog-commenting and activity were discussed here before – perhaps on your blog? I’m not sure I’ll ever truly understand internet communication, or why some bloggers have a strong presence and an adoring flock of commenters. ZOMG! UR sooo teh awesome … teh creationists r totally pwned! :-P
Being able to track traffic statistics in real time (e.g., Sitemeter) or almost-real-time but in great detail (e.g., Google Analytics) is essential for getting motivated to blog. Good, detailed science posts often appear as definitive pieces, with all Ts crossed and all Is dotted, and nothing for readers to add. But software tells you that people are reading, bookmarking and sharing those posts over long periods of time (years!). The quick, provocative posts may elicit more comments instantly, but they die off fast as well.
A couple of months ago, I did an analysis of my own posts
Take-home message: make sure Google tracks your blog, especially Google Images!
Stephen, we are looking into various ways of providing the bloggers with more traffic stats, either through online tools you can use yourself or ways we can give you guys stats. A lot depends on internal resources though!
Kristi, you bring up an interesting point about the nature of blogging. What does everyone think about Kristi’s point?: Blogging can be, in many ways, a self-involved, self-referential, and self-congratulatory activity, and so in my circumstances, it seems more than a little hypocritical.
Kristi, are you worried about what people in the scientific community think of someone who blogs? I would hope that scientists are judged on the quality of their writing in their blogs, and not on the fact that they even have a blog in the first place. People blog for lots of different reasons and ‘self-congratulation’ isn’t the only one. (And there are plenty of scientists who don’t blog but who do plenty of self-referencing/self-promotion in lots of other ways!)
@Bora – many thanks for that but I had a look at Google Analytics and the procedure requires you to include a bit of javascript code at the top of each entry. I’m not sure if we can do that on Nature Network.
@Corie – would this work? Or do we need to rely on you guys to set something up?
Oh, I have no intention of quitting. I just wish I was better, and that requires practice
The point about blogs not needing to be frequent is a good one, and something I think a lot of people misunderstand when they start blogging. It’s not a chore, and you don’t have to do anything, but many of the “So You Want To Be A Blogger”-type talks are by people who post five times a day on multiple blogs.
Stephen, we already have Google Analytics set up for the entire Nature Network site and I’m told by our tech guy that because it’s set up for all of NN, we can’t provide individual bloggers access to the GA stats for just their blog pages. However, we might be able to provide stats reports to you and others. Like I said, that depends on internal resources.
When we move the blogs over to Moveable Type, that will open up other options for traffic tracking. I will be creating a private group and inviting all the NN bloggers to it soon where we can discuss these sorts of issues in greater detail. We’ll use that to keep you informed about moving your blogs over to Moveable Type.
If you have Google Analytics for NN set up, there is content drilldown there and each blogger can go in there and check out their own stats for their own pages. On scienceblogs.com every blogger can look up all sorts of stats for every and any page on the network, but mostly people just look at their own stats. I think that this is very important information for bloggers to have at their fingertips – it is a kind of feedback that comments cannot provide.
This is an interesting post about blogging….
Bora hits it on the head there with the point about feedback. How is one going to know whether something ‘works’ or not? I think that’s (still) my problem.
It’s like yelling into the wind but being deaf to one’s own echoes. Disturbing.
Personally, I think like any writing, you have to put it out there and take it on faith, and you shouldn’t do it unless you genuinely enjoy the exercise. I don’t care how many people read my blog — for me, the creative act of doing it is what I enjoy. And access stats can never tell you if the person who clicked on your piece actually bothered to read it — just as book sales can’t tell you if anyone got past the first page of your novel, and newspaper circulation stats can’t tell yow how many people read your article over their morning coffee. In that respect, personalized feedback (as in comments on blogs) is the only way to truly know if you are making an impact (even though it could be an under-representation of who might have read and enjoyed your ideas, to be sure.)
Jenny, I think the way to tell success from blog stats – as well as book sales – would be whether they’re increasing over time, wouldn’t it? Otherwise, of course you’re right – individual feedback via comments is the non plus ultra. Although sometimes (frequently?) commenters get prompted by each other, not the original post.
Just to put it out there (continuously and undeterred) also requires a level of confidence which not everyone has. I know I don’t.
The rapid feedback in the form of comments is why I spend so much time writing blog posts, when I really should be developing other projects instead.
I don’t know, Steffi. LabLit, for example, has had brisk, but remarkably stable traffic figures for the past two years, but I can easily measure its growing success more because of the feedback — a massive increase in submissions, press coverage and letters to the editorial inbox. So for LabLit, there hasn’t been a correlation at all in traditional stats and presumed impact at all, beyond the initial first-year growth phase.
I think comments prompting comments is a sign that the initial post created a conversation, and this should not be undervalued. And there is no question that writing — or going out on a limb and exposing yourself publicly in any endeavor — requires confidence. I don’t think anyone would deny that.
Jenny, I think what’s happening with LabLit in terms of getting more comments is that you’re building a community. Same with blogs (and I know many people have described this before). When you have a community, people are familiar with the blog (and you with them), they start commenting more (I am not talking about very controversial or inflammatory posts here).
New bloggers don’t have that yet – although starting a blog on NN is a big luxury and unlike other blogging sites in that respect, because you’re starting right into a relatively tight community and your chances of getting some comments are higher. Otherwise, the number of page hits may be the only way to tell for newbies like me, and any kind of feedback is vital to improve.
There are now many blogs I read and very much enjoy, but never comment on…
My point is the community coalesced long after the viewing traffic plateaued. So the stats were never that predictive. Of course other experiences may differ.
I agree with Cath and Jenny about the value of getting feedback via comments, and Jenny’s point that you should blog for the enjoyment of the writing. But, while it is potentially dangerous to be chasing numbers (whether comments or hits), I think Steffi is right that some additional indication that your blog post is not being ignored does provide an important stimulus – especially to newbies.
@Corie – I’ll be looking out for your group on the new blogging tools!
I am an anonymous LabLit reader. It comes in through RSS, and sometimes I click on things.
And I also read a lot of blogs that way.
A writer’s curse is that he bares his soul
Before a dark and merciless black hole.
But are we spoiled, to wish for Google’s tools?
When I began, we should have thought them fools
Who needed instant feedback on their prose.
We’d ask the void: the answer? No-one knows!
We’d write in print, or broadcast on the air
Just doing it we reasoned more than fair.
That lucky break we’d worked hard to achieve.
To seize it, nurture it, we’d leave
No stone unturned to make our voices heard.
We’d thrill to know if others read one word
Of our stuff. When I wrote for The Times
I churned it out six days in every week
Printed on a page not hard to seek
The op-ed page not far from Bernard Levin
(A Wagnerian wit who’s since gone off to heaven).
So, several hundred thousand souls had seen
My writings, ‘neath the doings of the Queen
(The Program of the Court was something solemn
That occupied a close adjacent column).
Yet did they ever think to send their quips
Before their paper wrapped their fish and chips,
Or used to clear a spill upon the floor?
In all that time I got less than a score
Of letters on my science orisons
(Including from Her Majesty’s Porisons).
And yet, impatient colleagues, that was all
We could discern, save shouting at the wall.
But yes, admittedly, the days were slower,
And expectations consequently lower.
Me too, Eva. (RSS).
When I started my personal blog more than 3 years ago, it rapidly became obvious how to increase traffic and I did it for a while. Then I realised my blog was becoming like work so I stopped and just posted what I wanted to. I disabled Site Meter and don’t even look at my stats because I don’t care. I want to post what I want. I am part of a small online community and I value that very much. One of my best real-life friends is someone that I “met” this way, and one of my best virtual friends similarly. It is not the quantity but “finding the person to connect with” that counts with me – and there may be only one or two people like that in the world!
If you want to get lots of traffic, then post about things that are popular – top TV series or top Google search terms in your post titles, for example. That will increase your traffice dramatically, if that’s what you want.
orisons/Porisons? Schlocking!
Otherwise brilliant.
Well said, Maxine. (And I enjoy all your various online missives very much, though I am not sure how you manage them all and have it not seem like work!)
Corie:
People blog for lots of different reasons and ‘self-congratulation’ isn’t the only one
Of course, and that’s why I was careful to write “blogging can be”, and “in my circumstances”. I’m not particularly worried about what people in my immediate scientific community think of someone who blogs, primarily because most of them aren’t really aware of, or interested in, science blogging.
Jennifer:
you shouldn’t do it unless you genuinely enjoy the exercise
That’s it exactly. I’m not sure at this point that I genuinely enjoy the exercise. I think perhaps rather not. Surely, not everyone who starts a blog (or two) is a talented, engaging, or natural writer in that format. I think writing in the more formal style of grant proposals and scientific papers feels less like pulling teeth, for me.
Maxine and Jenny – if anyone did just want to increase their traffic artificially by posting ‘popular items’, I (personally) don’t think NN would be the place for that – they’d be called on it pretty quickly. I’m just interested in writing as well as possible on my blog, to get a maximum of people interested in the subjects. At least we can all agree that comments are a wonderful form of feedback!
Heh. Steffi, we’ve seen a few people try just that—and they tend to get soundly ignored.
Stephen’s right in that feedback stats can be useful to shoring up motivation early on. I definitely got a guilty pleasure from checking my stats on my previous blog. But I would tend to agree with Jenny and Maxine that such stats are rapidly unsatisfying.
The truly insecure person, such as I can be from time to time, ends up wondering if the stats actually reflect whether the readers care, or matter because they are one-offs, or if the hits mostly represent bots.
So, like Maxine, I’d left off checking. I had made an early attempt with Google Analytics here and run into the same snags brought up by Stephen and Corie, but in the end, I am not sure it is really necessary. Besides, from the other side, how do you feel as a reader that your every click-and-glance is logged and visible, and perhaps identifiable? I feel ambiguous about that, and wonder if anyone notices how many times I check “network replies” per day ;-)
Comments are therefore the gold standard. However, I’m very happy with one or two, of course with more if I have unwittingly hosted a conversation salon. Post after post with zero comments that can be quickly demotivating for me, an exercise in futile navel-gazing.
Bora’s links out were both very relevant – thanks. I certainly have continued blogging over these four years because of a sort of “it’s good for you” mindset, also because I hate starting something and dropping it “too” quickly – but the cut-off is individually determined. Kristi, if you or anyone else doesn’t want to continue, you’re not obliged! but if it was demotivation because of the lack of feedback, know that your contributions are indeed valued (and read).
OK, I’ll preface this comment with “hm… interesting thought tangent” from the discussion that may not be interesting to anyone else:
I find often that I don’t comment on the best posts, mostly because I feel like I should add something interesting or important, and if I don’t have something smart to say, I say nothing at all. I mean, I guess a “wow, thanks” here and there might be nice for the writer, but somehow I usually feel silly adding so little to the post. If there’s an interesting debate, link, etc, then I might chime in, but if I’m uncertain of what to say or walk away thinking about a post, I often won’t.
Yet, when I think about it, I consider comments to ‘rate’ my posts of sorts… so I guess I’m a little hypocritical.
I’m thinking that from now on I’ll comment on posts I like whether I add anything smart or not – particularly to say “well done.”
I think for some of us the outlet alone is enough. I had a blog, long since gone, that I kept up very reguarly for years, but didn’t looked at site traffic for a long time. I assumed almost no one read it because I got few comments, but when I finally started looking at my stats I found I had thousands of readers each week, from all over the world! I hated shutting it down.
I’ve posted on NN posts I thought were good and got bugger all comments, but it’s OK. I know people read it, and if you’ve got nothing constructive to say, that fine. And if no one reads it, to me that’s OK too. It’s a creative outlet I enjoy. Same as writing for lablit (oh, I owe a big time to Jenny too).
Although Christie is right about a “nice post” comment being a good way of being in the scene. I lurk on many blogs, but comment very rarely…
Congratulations to all six!