Not by a Longshot?

September 1st, 2010
By Dave Mosher

Longshot magazine (formerly 48 HR magazine*) screamed onto the internet/magazine/media experimentation scene in May, and went for round two this past weekend. Never heard of it? The magazine’s maxim is as follows: Produce a full, glossy and finished issue in 48 hours or less(!).

The editors pull it off by decreeing a theme, then granting hopeful contributors 24 hours** to submit their text, photos, illustrations and other content. In the following 24 hours, the mag’s staff selects, arranges, generates art, edits, fact-checks, copyedits, designs and posts a final product to an on-demand magazine publisher called MagCloud.

I didn’t make the cut in issue “zero” (as I lament in another post), themed hustle, nor did I make it this time around in issue one, themed comeback.

But I’m not too bummed about it, seeing as there were hundreds of submissions, many by writers I hold immense respect for. I can also see many reasons why my submission wasn’t published — in a way, I’m glad. To name a couple shortcomings, the piece had at least one error (fixed in this version) and it lacked proper context/explanation (not fixed).

In my defense, I hope Longshot manages to launch an issue when I:

a) am not moving at a high rate of speed

b) have a reliable (or any) internet connection

and

c) can commit my full, undivided attention for more than a few minutes at a time

Even if that day never arrives, I’ll still crank out content for them in a frenzied, disorderly way. In the meantime, constructive criticism is welcome:

Read the rest of this entry »

The ten commandments of science journalism

August 24th, 2010
By Dave Mosher

Journalists take a lot of flak these days.

For every article bravely shipped to an editor, journos risk a volley from Joe Audience, Jane Stakeholder and even fellow colleagues. Some criticism is well-deserved and well-put. The rest of it is any combination of uninformed, nonconstructive and downright mean.

I lack the institutional knowledge of my, er, “finely aged” colleagues (by no fault of my baby-faced self), but it seems to me that the anonymity, immediacy and searchability of the ‘net has lubricated the delivery of such criticism. In a not-so-great way.

Thus, it’s with great relief that I recently see not one but two very well-crafted criticisms of journalism. The first is Alexis Madrigal’s artful response to a recent Wired magazine piece, the second a review of “The Seven Deadly Sins Of Science Journalism” by Jonathan Parkinson at Science 2.0.

For this post I’m sticking to the latter piece, since it echoes some of the elements of Madrigal’s critique (e.g. sensationalism, oversimplification, getting it wrong, etc.). Also, some would argue the Wired.com blowup isn’t really about science journalism — and this is a sciencey blog, for crissakes!

If you’re too pressed for time, here’s Parkinson’s cardinal list:

  1. Sensationalized reporting
  2. Over-reliance on press releases
  3. Detail-free reporting
  4. Oversimplifying/getting it wrong
  5. Appeal to authority and cheerleading
  6. Jargon
  7. Overworked cliches

I think it’s an extremely valid set of criticisms. But it’s a little light on constructive guidelines for my tastes.

Hence, therefore, I offer you ten commandments of science journalism!

Read the rest of this entry »

F***ing magnets, how do they work?

August 17th, 2010
By Dave Mosher

One curse of having a brain comprised of 20ish billion neurons (and 7,000 times as many synaptic connections*) is that music can get seriously stuck in it.

Awful, terrible, mind-numbingly stupid music.

Case in point, the Insane Clown Posse’s tune “Miracles”:

If you haven’t listened to this addictive form of brain corrosion closely, here’s a sample of the lyrics:

The sun and the moon, and even Mars
The Milky Way and fucking shooting stars
UFOs, a river flows
Plant a little seed and nature grows
Niagara falls and the pyramids
Everything you believed in as kids
Fucking rainbows after it rains
There’s enough miracles here to blow your brains

It gets better. Better being worse, of course.

About halfway through, ICP tells its juggalo followers that magnets are magical and all scientists are liars:

Read the rest of this entry »

Plagiarism as a spectrum

July 26th, 2010
By Dave Mosher

cheating on a testLast week, fresh in the wake of the digital hurricane that was PepsiGate, science writer Brian Switek saw a funny thing: what appeared to be part of his story on a website he had never written for.

On July 16, Smithsonian.com ran a piece Switek wrote about dinosaurs that snacked on unfortunate burrowing mammals (with cool skeleton-in-the-stomach fossils to boot). As is common in the competitive science news industry, some other outlet — Tom Feilden’s blog at the BBC in this case — eventually posted a similar piece.

But according to Switek and many others, the wording in the BBC’s post looked a bit too similar.

Switek pointed out this curiosity in the article’s comments section, eventually announcing “slimy” behavior on Twitter. Allegations of  plagiarism ensued, and Charlie Petit of Knight Science Journalism Tracker played referee.

Read the rest of this entry »

What IS this bug?

July 14th, 2010
By Dave Mosher

praying mantis leaf insect, Phyllium bioculatumOne of my favorite courses in college was Entomology 500. The gist: Capture a crapload of bugs, mount them on pins, identify them to a species, and finally show to them off for reactions of a) abject horror or b) nerdly squeals of delight.

As much as I’d like to personally identify your mystery bug(s) for you, there’s a better way: The Internet! (What else did you expect?)

Below are some free services to which you can submit creepy crawly bug photos, and a trained expert will respond with their best identification:

  • PestControlCanada.com – A straightforward site where the curious send in their photos, and volunteer bug pros respond in a few days. Not geared for the kill-nothing Buddhist types (i.e. “pest control” in the URL), but they do have a simple setup with nice-sized images.*
  • WhatsThatBug.com – More verbose identifications than the previous site, but the concept is the same: email your bugs, get them looked at. One big difference, however, is the “Why you gotta hate on insects?” attitude, as evidenced by the “Unnecessary Carnage” section that scolds bug squashers.
  • University of Minnesota’s insect gallery – If you’re too impatient for a pro’s analysis, this is a convenient self-guided process-of-elimination tool. Trouble is, there’s only a handful of bugs — but to turn it around again, the ones you’d most commonly notice/encounter are listed. A nice start before throwing in the towel.
  • Aardvark – To get a little social media on you, Vark.com is a great service to answer tough-to-Google questions — like “what is this bug?” This is because living breathing people (including entomologists and other bug experts) are on standby to answer strangers’ questions. You’ll need an instant message program and a means to post your photos publicly, but it’s a near-instant setup.

Speaking of ID’ing animals, it’s time for a few words on species.

Read the rest of this entry »

Photos: Manhattanhenge

July 11th, 2010
By Dave Mosher

Manhattanhenge 2010 sunset silhouetteManhattan’s streets are aligned on a wonderfully regular grid, a relief to perfectionist types out there who crave order in their arrangement of asphalt.

But it ain’t perfect, and I’m not talking about downtown’s quagmire of back streets.

As it turns out, New York City’s grid is slightly skewed in a clockwise direction because, well… it makes more sense given the shape and direction of “Mannahatta.”

Cartographers often fool the foolhardy, however, by rotating streets into a more aesthetically pleasing arrangement (to agree with a map’s rectangular shape). Don’t believe me? Look for the compass on MTA’s subway map. It’s hanging out in the Long Island Sound.

Anyway, this regularity that’s a wee bit off creates not one but two golden opportunities — arguably four, if you like seeing half our backyard star — for photography and astronomy nerds.

Read the rest of this entry »