Science and the Media
The department's editor, Steven T. Corneliussen, is a media analyst for the American Institute of Physics. He monitors three national newspapers, the weeklies Nature and Science, and occasionally other publications. He has published op-eds in the Washington Post and other newspapers, has written for NASA's history program, and is a science writer at a particle-accelerator laboratory.
A nuclear engineer advocates nuclear power for future energy needs; readers are invited to comment.
Sixteen adamant climate-consensus disbelievers publish their second long op-ed in less than a month.
The Times reacts immediately to news from Nature Nanotechnology.
Nature's editors urge scientists to find efficiencies before politicians impose them.
A "lecture backlash" reflects the contrast between the deficit model and the engagement model in science outreach.
A Nature commentary and rebuttal letter spotlight the conceptual conflict.
Belated but respectful obituaries revisit his efforts to avert the 1986 shuttle Challenger disaster.
Media coverage includes the fun—but also some serious news about STEM education.
Priya Natarajan's thoughts complement recent similar calls in Science.
Pervez Hoodbhoy's three January newspaper analyses advocate nuclear restraint.
Teaser blurb says, "Sixteen concerned scientists: No need to panic about global warming."
In a letter, the editor of the New England Journal of Medicine calls for distinguishing medical from scientific papers.
In his State of the Union address, President Obama touches on issues pertinent to the science community.
It's an opportunity for scientists to contribute letters to the editor—but they must act fast.
Letters appear in the New York Times from the New England Journal of Medicine and the American Physical Society.
A Guardian commentary attacks; a New York Times feature offers thoughtful future-mindedness.
The Times calls this information-technology achievement the result of "a heated international race between elite physics laboratories."
A growing number of technopolitical murders starts to look like a campaign.
Public Library of Science founder Michael B. Eisen also calls for scientific societies to quit the Association of American Publishers.
Recent editions of the New York Times and the Washington Post highlight physics-related stories.
Has the reduced media attention hampered study of links between climate change and extreme weather events?
To what extent, if any, should—and can—biosecurity trump openness?
Commentaries challenge phony science and Islamic extremists' incitements to violence.
The news article is based on a scientific paper and an explanatory essay in Nature.
"Exhaustion, corruption, cronyism" could affect spaceflight—and therefore NASA.
Newspaper front pages report biosecurity request that Science and Nature withhold information.
Washington Post front page reports that the particle might well appear at CERN in the predicted energy range.
In City Journal, the Manhattan Institute's Sol Stern alleges unintended negative consequences from NCLB.
A New York Times op-ed presents the debate scientists are having over the name Anthropocene.
The Wall Street Journal offers "Why time travel won't be like the movies: A few basics will make it easy as pi—like antimatter, antigravity and neutron stars."
Has "Climategate" actually had little political effect, as Nature's editors assert?
Representative Cliff Stearns takes a hard line in response to a Times editorial.
Theoretical physicist Robert Garisto tells the story of a bet about the future of fundamental physics.
Media coverage varies widely on the newly revealed second batch of UK climatologists' email.
MSNBC, CNN, Fox, Daily Mail, and Wired UK suggest to the public that the “E-Cat” might be legitimate.
One kind of systematic error is now said to have been ruled out; others remain at issue.
The geopolitical part involves Marines in Australia; the technopolitical part involves space-science collaboration.
Final line says, “Perhaps [he] will still do the honorable thing, if only for the sake of his reputation.”
Joel Achenbach’s prominently displayed commentary quotes well-known physicists.
Half-page article covers astrology-based advising and claims of psychic powers.
The power company Ameren withdraws from federal FutureGen demonstration project.
The Big Bang Theory is seen as one of several possible motivators.
Editorial assesses recent developments in freedom-of-information case involving climatologist Michael Mann.
In Wednesday's presidential debate, Governor Rick Perry ticks off Commerce, Education—but can't call third target to mind.
Republican senator’s actual criticisms of the National Science Foundation are left undiscussed.
Columnist sees and deplores extremism on both sides of the "fracking" controversy.
Article outlines seven-decade career that started under Rabi at Columbia.
Comedy Central's fake-news Daily Show of 26 October merits physics community's attention.
It's an obvious opportunity for physicists to join, and maybe help lead, an important technocivic discussion.
Front page flags article summarizing JWST’s exciting science prospects—and perilous budget realities.
Solyndra political analysis trumpets what it treats as a revelation: politics isn’t physics. Analysis in the New Yorker presents a completely different spin.
Dennis Overbye invokes poet, singers in reporting physicists’ continuing skepticism.
The headline reads “The post-global warming world: Moving on from climate virtue.”
Climate skeptic’s Berkeley study refutes assertions that the planet is not really warming.
The government makes an effort to rise above “slapdash and irrelevant publications read by next to no one.”
Virginia Republican Representative Frank Wolf presses to restrict bilateral activities.
Editorial sees hard but not hopeless times; article is less optimistic
Article, not editorial, in business-focused national newspaper proclaims the start of a new energy era
Columnist known for climate skepticism expresses joy and awe at physics research result
Proposal co-authored by scientist and engineer who write for the general public
What—if anything—might that consensus have to do with speedy neutrinos or quasicrystals?
Harvard’s Robert P. Kirshner ponders implications of the 2011 Nobel Prize in Physics.
Bipartisan Policy Center declares that the time has come to study and consider geoengineering.
Press reports on new study from the journal Pediatrics.
Prominently placed Style section article reviews a “graphic novel” about the memorable Nobel laureate.
In a New York Times commentary, poet Diane Ackerman conjures a flourishing NASA.
Wall Street Journal sees “scandal”; New York Times calls for more spending; Washington Post comes out in between.
Initial reactions to speedy-neutrino news reinforced at Washington Post, New York Times, Wall Street Journal.
After former federal science officials William Happer and Raymond Orbach point out the limitations placed on the climate implications of CERN’s CLOUD experiment, climate skeptics respond.
Newspaper borrows and runs a New Scientist piece; this year’s 22 winners include 9 scientists, with Harvard condensed-matter physicist Markus Greiner among them
Administration to support scientists in workplace flexibility for work-life balance
Announcement of provisional European result makes next day’s print editions of the New York Times and Washington Post
Op-ed in Wall Street Journal predicts direct and indirect benefits, including for science and technology
Pulitzer-winning student of oil industry sees rapid changes but no oil peak
Is global climate disruption as plain as “high school physics”?
What’s the effect of this show’s nerd caricatures on public perceptions of the physics profession?
The climate consensus caused APS fellow Ivar Giaever of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute to quit
Editors of the Wall Street Journal charge “vaccine demagoguery”; former Bush speechwriter charges “public health illiteracy”
Online, nonprofit “SciDev.net” covers and promotes science and technology in the developing world
“Attribution scientists” could run “operational climate-attribution systems”
One says they “deserve our admiration, not our contempt”; the other says they “feel defensive and less respected”
Commentary amplifies the climate-wars politicization of CERN’s CLOUD experiment
“A Final Smash For America's Giant Particle Collider”
Opinion editors on climate science: Anecdotal report 2
Opinion editors on climate science: Anecdotal report 1
“Invitation to a Dialogue” offers chance for outreach by the physics community
Essay in Nature urges colleagues to ensure their own security while the Chronicle takes a closer look at the group behind the attacks.
Climate contentiousness in the presidential primaries—and a "litmus test"
The Times’s source, a study in Science, actually focuses only on the National Institutes of Health.
“Invitation to a Dialogue” means science-outreach opportunity on energy
Both articles see compromise between the 12 member congressional “supercommittee” as crucial.
“Scar on the moral body of science” is mostly in biomedicine, but physics is criticized too.
New York Times writer Cornelia Dean says scientists shun politics and most citizens can't name a scientist.
"Not so much an obituary as an editorial rehashing the political agenda of those who intensely disliked Bush and his policies," says Frederick M. Bernthal.
Center for American Progress blogger contrasts with two New York Times writers
Criticizes shuttle, calls for manned exploration, advocates James Webb Space Telescope
Can Dennis Overbye's science writing teach anything about connecting nonscientists with science?
Physicist, university president, national lab director and presidential science adviser dies at 70 after a long illness.
Newspaper obituaries highlight the contentious technopolitics of his eight years advising President George W. Bush
Editorial and news feature portray “violent collision of world views”
Two topics: physical constants more sharply defined; no exotic results from Large Hadron Collider
Opportunity to discuss an aerospace engineer’s view of the future-of-NASA. Will members of the physics community respond?
Commentary in this week’s Nature
Editorial, two op-eds, front-page feature criticize Congress, warn of dire future
Story reported prominently in New York Times “Science Times”
Proposers for NSF grants must now cite specific national priorities
Will this mean more branding of the physics profession? If so, what kind?
Impending federal anti-incandescent mandate is criticized as excessive government intrusion — and advocated as a tremendous energy saver.
A Wall Street Journal letter writer wants to know
New York Times invites public to debate school reform
New York Times op-ed calls nuclear fusion “essentially inexhaustible" source of energy
So declares New York Times science writer Dennis Overbye—citing physics's own "Alpinekat," Kate McAlpine
Are open access journals becoming more popular than traditional scholarly publishing? A paper in PLoS One looks to some trends.
German Chancellor (and physicist) Merkel criticized on science, President Obama on law
What are the threats? What can be done?
Medical physics issues return to New York Times front page: Overuse of CT scanning? The Washington Post follows one day later
Illnesses in Germany highlight a question: Can a physics tool enhance food safety?
Jump to Content
View Cart
Facebook
Twitter
rss
E-mail alert
This Publication
Scitation
SPIN
Scitopia
Google Scholar
PubMed