))
Scicomm jargon that matters
Manage episode 338168204 series 2988652
Вміст надано Meteor SciComm. Весь вміст подкастів, включаючи епізоди, графіку та описи подкастів, завантажується та надається безпосередньо компанією Meteor SciComm або його партнером по платформі подкастів. Якщо ви вважаєте, що хтось використовує ваш захищений авторським правом твір без вашого дозволу, ви можете виконати процедуру, описану тут https://uk.player.fm/legal.
First, a reminder - applications for the first cohort of SciComm STEP are due TOMORROW: August 19, 2022! Listen to this episode for details and visit our website to apply! https://www.meteorscicomm.org/scicomm-step
There’s a lot of jargon in science, so it’s no surprise there’s also a lot of jargon in scicomm. We’ve been chatting… aaaand ranting… about scicomm jargon for a while. So we thought we’d go out on a limb and say what jargon we think works, what matters, and what jargon debates feel unnecessary.
Why does the jargon matter? Because our work -- scicomm -- is about people, and words matter to people.
So this week, we tackle things like:
- Being ready for situations by having thought through the terms you prioritize
- The debate about being a scicomm trainer vs. scicomm facilitator
- Scientific communication vs. science communication (aka scicomm)
- Bethann’s rant that ‘blogging isn’t dead’ and ‘newsletters are just blogs’
- Citizen science vs. community science vs. civic science
Dig in for yourself: What’s an aspect of scicomm jargon that you think really matters …or maybe one that you think is downright silly?
Thanks for listening! Share your jargon rant with us at https://www.twitter.com/meteorscicomm!
32 епізодів
Поширити
