Knight Science Journalism Tracker - Updates

Lately one often encounters discussion of US research supremacy in context with ferment in a China that, after becoming the foremost, high-tech workshop for the world, is driving hard to seize prominence in innovative basic and applied research too and good for it. We need the competition.

This is a meandering post that will wind up with a minor point, thud. And it doesn’t have to do as much with international science rankings or even science journalism as with one of the latter’s prominent feed stocks: press releases. Bear with me, for there’s a journalism observation too.

Onward. Awareness that China’s rise in the world of high-level, original scientific research is a current topic is why, when the latest tip sheet for press from the American Chemical Society arrived, I perked up. It highlights two instances of Chinese research. It also shines a light on a piece of watermelon-related research performed in Turkey. Very international, this tip sheet is. But back to the Chinese ones. [...]

Sometimes ya gotta wonder: Do the people who write for The New York Times actually read The New York Times?

Sunday’s Book Review had a review by Robin Marantz Henig of a new book on disgust by Rachel Herz, a psychologist at Brown.

Tuesday’s Science Times had a story by James Gorman on disgust, which didn’t mention that the subject had just come up in the paper two days earlier. Was Gorman aware of the coincidence, if that’s what it was? And if so, why didn’t he make the link for readers? A seemingly authoritative piece in the Times that ignores a recent story in the paper suggests either that Herz and her book are not worthy of consideration, and the book should not have been reviewed, or it suggests that Gorman’s reporting was not very thorough.

I know what you’re thinking: Science Times went to bed before the Book Review appeared on Sunday. I don’t know when Science Times goes to bed, but the book review comes [...]

To unsubscribe this feed by mail service, click here.