Month: March 2012
On Monday 12 March 2012, researchers from the Harvard Medical School released a study in which linked the consumption of red meat to an increased chance of early death. The study, entitled ‘Red Meat Consumption and Mortality‘ was published in the Archives of Internal Medicine. It was also accompanied by an editorial entitled ‘Holy Cow! What’s Good for you is Good for Our Planet‘.
The researchers tracked 37698 men for 22 years and 83698 women for 28 years. All the participants were free of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer when tracking commenced. The diets of the participants were evaluated through questionnaires every four years. The subjects who consumed a card-deck-sized serving of unprocessed red meat each day on average saw a 13 percent higher risk of dying than those who did not consume red meat with the same frequency.
The study has garnered a considerable amount of attention. At the time of initial writing (around 21:00 on the evening of Tuesday 13 March 2012), there were 211 stories related articles that can be accessed on Google News. Another check around 23:00 on the evening of Tuesday 13 March 2012, showed that there were 231 related stories. Here are some examples of the headlines from some of the media outlets across:
The Independent – ‘Red meat increases risk of early death, says study‘
The Telegraph – ‘Red meat is blamed for one in 10 early deaths‘
United States of America
The LA Times – ‘All red meat is bad for you, new study says‘
ABC News – ‘Red Meat Tied to Increased Mortality Risk‘
Harvard Magazine – ‘Don’t Pass the Bacon‘
Fox News – ‘Red meat linked to premature death, research finds‘
Globe and Mail – ‘Red meat increases risk of death from cancer‘
Toronto Star – ‘Red meat linked to higher risk of premature death: Harvard study‘
Montreal Gazette – ‘Red meat linked to higher risk of premature death‘
The Sydney Morning Herald – ‘Huge study shows red meat boosts risk of dying young‘
Victor Harbor Times – ‘Love affair with flesh hits a snag as study links red meat to risk of death‘
Reuters – ‘More support for passing on the red meat‘
CNN International – ‘Study: Too much red meat may shorten lifespan‘
Media outlets exist within a context that is structured by the competition for public’s attention. Being constantly bombarded by a variety of stimuli, public attention can be fleeting and therefore is extremely valuable. Consequently, in order to capture the attention, media outlets must refer to very striking differences (differences from the ‘norm’). A response will only be garnered by a strong stimuli (Neidhardt, 1993).
As Neidhardt (1993), points out, the aforegoing scenario leads to implementation of particular strategies:
1) “…existing Material can become loaded linguistically by ‘the use of intense language’.” (p.343)
2) “…the selection of the material is guided by a preference for strongly deviating cases.” (p.343)
Case in point, the aforementioned study.
Neidhardt, F. (1993). ‘The Public as a Communication System’ Public Understand. Sci. 2, 339-350. doi: 10.1088/0963-6625/2/4/004
Pan, A., Sun, Q., Bernstein, A.M., Schulze, M.B., Manson, J.E., Stampfer, M.J., Willett, W.C., Hu, F.B. (2012). ‘Red Meat Consumption and Mortality’ Arch Intern Med. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2011.2287
There is a great annual competition, ‘Dance Your PhD’. It is a competition run by Science Magazine with the aim of recognizing the best dance interpretation of scientific doctoral work. You can catch up on last year’s winners in physics, biology, chemistry and social sciences here.
The ‘Dance Your PhD’ Contest is run by scientist and writer, John Bohannon. In this TED talk, John makes a proposal: Use dancers instead of powerpoint.
The complex relationship between scientific and social worlds has created an emphasis on scientists to engage with the non-academic world and communicate their research in an effective manner (This is increasingly becoming the case across the sciences and the social sciences alike).
In many cases, scientists are talking the talk about more effective communication to non-academic audiences.
The challenge that still remains is to walk the walk. Perhaps dancing the walk is the way to go for some scientists?
On the ‘About the Blog’ page of this blog, I made a pledge to steer away from a constant bias of being a former scientist and being someone who studies communication of scientific research in my posts. In keeping with this pledge, I’d like to begin with history. I love history, which is why I was so excited when I came across this post from Open Culture (who mention The Atlantic story).
At the moment, there is a brilliant exhibition going on at the Amsterdam Museum, named Amsterdam DNA. The exhibition is designed to capture the rich history of Amsterdam. The museum teamed up with the Dutch creative agency PlusOne to produce a series of videos for the exhibition. Here is the trailer for the exhibition:
The exhibition provides a 45 minute multimedia experience through the rich history of Amsterdam. The agency produced 7 films for the exhibition. Below you can see a clip from the second film called Revolt Against King and Church, which takes you back to 16th century Amsterdam.
You can read the interview with the director of PlusOne, Martijn Hogenkamp, about the creative development of the project here.
Lessons for Research Communication
Video is a powerful medium with the ability to reach a variety of audiences. More researchers across all fields should to consider doing videos to communicate their research to non-academic audiences. Having said that, not everyone has the technical know-how or the budgets the size of Amsterdam Museum. This is where collaboration comes in handy. There are plenty of graphics designers, illustrators and animators out there with various skill levels. And with tools like Twitter, they are a lot easier to find than one may think. So why not try? (Yes; I am aware of time constraints, job commitments, life, etc.) It is still possible to achieve great results. Check out this health promotion video that went viral here.