You might to refer your scientists to The Conversation, which has successfully engaged academics in their approach to publishing. It now has more than 840,000 unique visitors a month. The quote below is from editor, Andrew Jaspen:
'Of course, everything depends on the willingness of academics to participate. During his study-tour of campuses in 2009, Jaspan constantly heard scholars complaining about news media. “Most of them see engaging with the community as fundamental to their role – they want to give back, and share their knowledge. But everyone had had experiences where a reporter had misunderstood or grossly misinterpreted what they’d said.” One by one, it seemed, many researchers had simply stopped talking to the media “because they couldn’t find a safe way to engage with the public.”
Jaspan needed to persuade them to re-engage, a task made simpler when Professor Peter Doherty joined The Conversation’s board. The Nobel Laureate and member of the Royal Society of London is someone, Jaspan says, “who summed up what this site was about: somebody who’s passionate about science and communicating science.”
But a lot of effort also went into setting up protocols to safeguard the site’s transparency and accountability. Only academics and researchers accredited by a university or research institute can contribute. They must disclose all funding sources and complete a profile detailing their specialist credentials. The site does not publish anonymous comments, and nothing is published until the contributor has signed off on the headline and final edit.- See more at: http://www.australiaunlimited.com/society/new-educated-press#sthash.iR9dvz2t.dpuf
On 25/06/2013, at 2:02 PM, George Aranda wrote:
I agree with Nancy in the difficulty of getting scientists to communicate – it’s not their fault J. At the recent ScienceRewired conference there was some discussion about scientists who use twitter and observe an increase in citations. One way you can approach scientists would be to advocate social media like twitter, which has been demonstrated to increase citations and then would provide those interested with a justification to use twitter in their own time. Here is a quick lit search: I plan to approach the Deakin Faculty of Science about similar things. I’m interested to learn if anyone can point me to some ‘pointers’ for ‘educating’ scientists and researchers on why publishing in peer reviewed international journals is not the be all and end all of communicating their research. Encouraging scientists to be comfortable with providing details to non-indexed publications, in other words working with media and communicating research, including purpose, methodology and findings, preliminary or otherwise, is the core of communication for science communicators, but sometimes it can be a battle, as we all know. Researchers, especially those in universities, have a publish or perish mentality and the scientific publishing numbers game they frequently insist on playing is to the detriment of the very people who fund them, often the taxpayer and, increasingly, private, corporate funders. If there’s public money involved, surely scientists have an obligation to let the wider community, not just their scientific peers, know what they’re up to, especially if there’s public good in the equation.
Important Notice: The contents of this email are intended solely for the named addressee and are confidential; any unauthorised use, reproduction or storage of the contents is expressly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please delete it and any attachments immediately and advise the sender by return email or telephone.
Deakin University does not warrant that this email and any attachments are error or virus free.
ASC-list mailing firstname.lastname@example.org://www.asc.asn.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=115