El periodista científico en la blogosfera de cienciaun actor privilegiado en un entorno digital abierto

  1. Cristina González-Pedraz 1
  2. Eva Campos-Domínguez 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Valladolid
    info

    Universidad de Valladolid

    Valladolid, España

    ROR https://ror.org/01fvbaw18

Journal:
Panace@: Revista de Medicina, Lenguaje y Traducción

ISSN: 1537-1964

Year of publication: 2015

Issue Title: Periodismo científico y biosanitario

Volume: 16

Issue: 42

Pages: 158-164

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Panace@: Revista de Medicina, Lenguaje y Traducción

Abstract

The goal of this article is to analyze the current science blogging scene based on three factors: the speaker (the blogger), the message (the post) and the receiver (the blogosphere). We also study the role of scientific journalism in this open digital environment. In order to do this, we performed a systematic review of references in English, Spanish, and Portuguese. We conclude that scientific journalists continue to play a key role since, unlike the other possible speakers, they are trained to do the work needed to offer quality information, such as contrasting sources.

Bibliographic References

  • Amsen, E. (2006): «Who Benefits From Science Blogging?», Hypothesis, 4 (2): 10-14. <http://journals.sfu.ca/hypot/index.php/main/article/view/56> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Asensi, F. (2013). «Comunicación digital e investigación científica», en VV. AA.: El científico ante los medios de comunicación. Retos y herramientas para una cooperación fructífera. Cuadernos de la Fundación Dr. Antoni Esteve n.o 28. Barcelona: Fundación Dr. Antonio Esteve, pp. 53-61. <http://www.raco.cat/index.php/QuadernsFDAE/ article/view/278728/366472> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Axelrod, L. (2010): «Brad L. Graham, coined the term ‘blogosphere’, dies at 41», The Birmingham News (4.I.2010). <http://blog.al.com/ scenesource/2010/01/brad_l_graham_coined_the.html> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Batts, S. A.; N. J. Anthis y T. C. Smith (2008): «Advancing science through conversations: Bridging the gap between blogs and the academy», PLoS Biology, 6 (9), e240: 1837-1841. <http://journals. plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.0060240> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Bell, A. (2012). «Has blogging changed science writing?», JCOM, 11, 1. <http:// jcom.sissa.it/sites/default/files/documents/Jcom1101%282012%29C02. pdf> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Blanchard, A. (2011): «Science blogs in research and popularization of science: why, how and for whom?», en J. B. Cockell, F. Darbellay y F. Waldvogel (eds.): Common knowledge: The challenge of transdisciplinarity. Lausana: EPFL Press, pp. 219-232. <http://www.peerevaluation.org/data/22fb0cee7e1f3bde58293de743871417/Blanchard_WKD_Science_blogs_2011.pdf> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Carrington, D. (2008): «How to set up a science blog». <http://www. scidev.net/global/icts/practical-guide/how-to-set-up-a-science-blog. html> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Carroll, S. (2007): «Blogging for physics», Physics World, 14. Chalmers, M. (2009): «Communicating physics in the information age», en R. Holliman, J. Thomas, S. Smidt, E. Scanlon y L. Whitelegg (eds.): Practising science communication in the information age: Theorising professional practices. Óxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 67-80.
  • Colson, V. (2011): «Science blogs as competing channels for the dissemination of science news», Journalism, 12 (7): 889-902.
  • Dash, A. (2010): «Remembering Brad L. Graham», A Blog About Making Culture. <http://anildash.com/2010/01/remembering-brad-lgraham.html> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Elías, C. (2008): Fundamentos de periodismo científico y divulgación mediática. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.
  • Flores, N. M. e I. M. A. M. Gomes (2013): «Blogs no campo científico: subjetivaçâo e profanaçâo», Intexto, 29: 199-215.
  • García Álvarez de Toledo, J. y R. Fernández Sánchez (2011): Difusión y divulgación científica en internet. Gobierno del Principado de Asturias. <http://ria.asturias.es/RIA/bitstream/123456789/1661/1/Difusion-ydivulgacion-cientifica-en-Internet.pdf> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Griffiths, M. (2007): «Talking physics in the social web», Physics world, 29 (1): 24-28. <http://cds.cern.ch/record/1012479/files/CMPRS00001253.pdf?version=1> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Gross, M. (2008): «Is science reporting turning into fast food?», Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics. <http://www.int-res.com/articles/esep2009/9/journalism/e009pp1.pdf> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Hermida, A. (2010): «Revitalizing science journalism for a digital age», en D. Kennedy y G. Overholser: Science and the Media. Cambridge, MA: American Academy of Arts and Sciences, pp. 80-87. <http://eprints. bournemouth.ac.uk/18642/1/JOU412688.pdf> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Kjellberg, S. (2010): «I am a blogging researcher: Motivations for blogging in a scholarly context», First Monday, 15 (8). <http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2962> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Kouper, I. (2010): «Science blogs and public engagement with science: practice, challenges and opportunities», JCOM, 9 (1). <http://jcom. sissa.it/sites/default/files/documents/Jcom0901%282010%29A02. pdf> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Kovic, I.; I. Lulic y G. Brumini (2008): «Examining the medical blogosphere: an online survey of medical bloggers», Journal of Medical Internet Research, 10 (3). <http://www.jmir.org/2008/3/e28/> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Luzón, M. J. (2013): «Public Communication of Science in Blogs Recontextualizing Scientific Discourse for a Diversified Audience», Written Communication, 30 (4): 428-457.
  • Mauranen, A. (2013): «Hybridism, edutainment, and doubt: Science blogging finding its feet», Nordic Journal of English Studies, 13 (1): 7-36. <http://ojs.ub.gu.se/ojs/index.php/njes/article/view/1795> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Michael, G. (2013): «Opening up the conversation: an exploratory study of science Bloggers». Trabajo de fin de máster. Universidad de Maryland. <http://drum.lib.umd.edu/bitstream/1903/14776/1/Masters_ umd_0117N_14637.pdf> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Nature (2009): «It´s good to blog». Editorial del número 457, 1058 (26.II.2009). <http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v457/n7233/ full/4571058a.html> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Nature (2009): «Filling the void». Editorial del número 458, 260 (19.III.2009). <http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v458/n7236/full/458260a.html> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Porto, C. y M. S. Palacios (2012): «O lugar eo peso da autopublicação na internet ea cultura científica no Brasil», Revista Educação e Cultura Contemporânea, 9 (18): 53-74. <http://revistaadmmade.estacio.br/ index.php/reeduc/article/viewArticle/264> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Priest, S. (2013): «Un panorama cambiante para los medios de comunicación: ciencia, público y prensa: el caso del cambio climático», Mètode: Revista de difusión de la Investigación, (80): 84-92. <http://metode. cat/es/Revistas/Monografics/La-ciencia-de-la-prensa/Un-panoramacanviant-per-als-mitjans-de-comunicacio> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Puschmann, C. (2014): «(Micro) Blogging Science? Notes on Potentials and Constraints of New Forms of Scholarly Communication», en S. Friesike y S. Bartling (eds.): Opening Science. Nueva York: Springer International Publishing, pp. 89-106. <http://link.springer.com/ chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_6> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Puschmann, C. y M. Mahrt (2012): «Scholarly blogging: A new form of publishing or science journalism 2.0», en A. Tokar, M. Beurskens, S. Keuneke, M. Mahrt, I. Peters, C. Puschmann, T. van Treeck y K. Weller (eds.): Science and the Internet. Düsseldorf: Düsseldorf University Press, pp. 171-181. <http://www.nfgwin.uni-duesseldorf.de/ sites/default/files/Puschmann.pdf> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Segado-Boj, F.; M. A. Chaparro e I. Berlanga (2014): «La divulgación en los blogs científicos hispanoparlantes. Funciones, fuentes, lenguaje y estrategias retóricas», Prisma Social, (12): 143-172. <http://www.academia.edu/8110373/La_divulgaci%C3%B3n_ en_los_blogs_cient%C3%ADficos_hispano-parlantes._Funciones_fuentes_lenguajes_y_estrategias_ret%C3%B3ricas> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Shanahan, M. C. (2011): «Science blogs as boundary layers: Creating and understanding new writer and reader interactions through science blogging», Journalism, 12 (7): 903-919.
  • Shema, H.; J. Bar-Ilan y M. Thelwall (2012a): «Research blogs and the discussion of scholarly information», PLoS ONE, 7(5): e35869. <http:// www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal. pone.0035869> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Shema, H.; J. Bar-Ilan y M. Thelwall (2012b): «Self-citation of bloggers in the science blogosphere», en A. Tokar, M. Beurskens, S. Keuneke, M. Mahrt, I. Peters, T. van Treeck y K. Weller (eds.): Science and the Internet. Düsseldorf: Düsseldorf University Press, pp. 183-192. <http://nfgwin.uni-duesseldorf.de/sites/default/files/Shema.pdf> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Thorsen, E. (2013): «Blogging on the ice: Connecting audiences with climate-change sciences», International Journal of Media & Cultural Politics, 9 (1): 87-101. Disponible en: <http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/21254/1/THORSEN-Blogging%20on%20the%20 ice%20post-edit.pdf> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
  • Tola, E. (2008): «To blog or not to blog, not a real choice there…», JCOM, 7 (2): 1-3. <http://jcom.sissa.it/archive/07/02/
  • Walejko, G. y T. Ksiazek (2010): «Blogging from the niches: The sourcing practices of science bloggers», Journalism Studies, 11 (3): 412-427.
  • Wang, X.; T. Jiang y F. Ma (2010): «Blog-supported scientific communication: An exploratory analysis based on social hyperlinks in a Chinese blog community», Journal of Information Science, 36 (6): 690-704.
  • Warden, R. (2010): «The Internet and science communication: blurring the boundaries», ecancermedicalscience, 4. <http://www.ncbi.nlm. nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3234032/> [consulta: 20.VII.2015].
Data source: Dialnet