Speak up and matter

2 minute read

Current Biology is running a short editorial by Geoffrey North, wishy-washing its way through a non-opinion about the value of blogging in science (“Social Media Likes and Dislikes”) North:social:2013. North gives a brief synopsis of the arsenic-eating bacteria fiasco (“An arsenical profile”, “Alien biology hype”), which he admits was a victory for the importance of blogging and the open science approach.

But he can’t help worrying about all those people exercising their free speech in science:

But there is also, I think, a danger here, which lies in the very speed of response, and the way that blogs are essentially vanity publications which lack the constraints of more conventional publishing they are not reviewed, and do not even have to pass the critical eye of any editor. In principle, anyone can write a blog and criticize anything they do not have to have any specific expertise. And the criticism can be picked up, advertised and amplified, for example by Twitter, by those who feel a post supports their agenda.
Such criticism can of course be harmful at the least there tends to be a no smoke without fire effect. And once a scientific reputation has been tainted, it can be hard to restore confidence.





