Summary: Social Media and the Scientific Community

I just posted my final project for JOMC-713:  Social Media and the Scientific Community.  It is a reflection of my coursework this semester and my interest in social media use by scientists and researchers. 

As there is compelling evidence that the acceptance and use of social media in the scientific community is dwarfed in comparison to its prevalence in the business sector, my paper explores the reasons behind that imbalance, and seeks to determine whether social media is a viable tool for the scientific community. 

Though its image is changing as it becomes more mainstream, social media is still largely viewed by the scientific community as a trivial, time-wasting activity that adds no intrinsic value in the real world.  The Facebook/Myspace teen-user image is still the dominant one.  The “science” personality may also contribute to the sparse number of scientists and researchers using social media.  There is a school of thought that researchers and scientists may be caught up in a vicious cycle of not having large social circles, which results in a limited amount of online social interaction, which in turn limits the size of their social circles.   

There are plenty of “experts” out there who are convinced that social media is a dead end in the realm of scientists and researchers.  My theory is that that those who are downplaying its potential are being short-sighted and not giving the community enough credit for its ability to creatively integrate new technologies.  Science is all about making new discoveries, and this group will surely discover new ways to utilize social media in their work.  They shouldn’t underestimate the motivation of social media platform providers, either, who will work hard to provide what this large group of participants will support and use. 

Read the entire paper here:  rachel_pittman_713_fa09_essay

Communication, Perspective, and Global Image

Brian Bowman of Backseat Broadband is making me a better citizen — at home and abroad.

Through his well-written and always insightful posts, Bowman has enlightened me about America’s woeful broadband deployment status, the issue of net neutrality, and, in a bit of change of pace, how America’s use of drones in Pakistan is complicating what many in the U.S. may view as a cut-and-dry initiative. (Start the series here)

I figure I’m a pretty typical American – by which I mean I rarely pay much attention to anything that doesn’t directly affect me. Sad, but true. I appreciate Backseat’s recent series on the impact of drone attacks – particularly the presentation of the Pakistani perspective, which is largely absent from my standard news sources.

In his series, Bowman looks at how our communication (or lack thereof) about the use of drones colors the perception of those who are experiencing the results of the attacks.

Secretary of State Clinton’s recent response to the problem was “we are at war”. While that’s true, I can only hope she said more. The US should better explain -why- the drone attacks are needed.

The next generation of boys and girls is watching from Pakistan, India, Iraq and Iran. They need to understand why the US is using this technology. If they see us as the aggressor, all the technology in the world won’t change their minds.

Hmmmm. Once stated, this seem so obvious. Thanks to Backseat Broadband, it IS obvious for at least one more American citizen.

Prescription for Healthcare Collaboration

On CommTechJunky recently, blogger Leah Gordon discussed an issue that was news to me.  In reading her post Knowledge is the Step Beyond Information, I was surprised to learn that there is little online collaboration in healthcare.  I considered the field of medicine to be a prime environment for information sharing.  Unlike those who make up the field of scientific research and discovery, aren’t doctors and nurses eager to quickly share patient care innovations with others?  According to Gordon, the problem seems to be a lack of tools for collaboration, not a lack enthusiasm. 

The post lists several promising sources for online collaboration, and I’d like to add one more.  GHDonline is the online arm of the Global Health Delivery Project, and it seems to be making some headway toward bringing members of the community together.  According to their site: 

GHDonline is where health care implementers share proven practices, connect with colleagues, and find resources they need to improve health outcomes in resource-limited settings.   – via GHDonline | Global Health Delivery Online: Improving health care delivery through global collaboration.

That sounds like just what the doctor ordered.  Here’s hoping sites like this continue to thrive, and generate even more opportunities for improving global health.  And hats off to CommTechJunky for shining the spotlight on an important global issue!

The Fear and Exhilaration of Breaking New Ground

I’m the Communications and Customer Service Manager for a 26 year old company that provides a specialized service that is predicated on absolute precision.  Our customers rely on us to validate the accuracy of their testing and research equipment, perform exact repairs when needed, and to provide measurement traceability for internal and external audit purposes.  It’s a pretty rigid environment populated by detail-focused academic and private-sector researchers and scientists. 

When I started my current graduate course, The Global Impact of New Communication Technologies, I didn’t think social media had any place whatsoever in my company’s business model.  Even a basic blog seemed too flip and trendy for our line of work.   

As it turns out, that initial intuition was well founded.  I’ve found numerous articles and blog posts proclaiming the lack of enthusiasm among scientists and researchers for social networking. 

“This is an odd finding, according to Richard Lackes of the Department of Business Information Management at Technische Universitaet Dortmund, Germany. He points out that scientific research is essentially a communication-driven process and that most of its participants are young and part of what we might refer to as the Facebook generation (Gen-F, you might say). Members of the business world have a much more even spread of ages and differences in internet acceptance, and yet, it is business users who are much more committed to online social networking.”  via Gen-F Scientists Ignoring Social Networking

Others attribute the ambivalence of scientists toward online social spaces to the need to protect the intellectual property of research projects.  Then there’s the whole perception of social networking as a frivolous waste of time  – time that could be better spent reading journals or running another batch of samples.    

“Scientists really don’t like discussing their thoughts and ideas in the public domain (both for scooping and patent issues) .  There may be an assumed lack of security on internet-based social networks and a time-wasting aspect in that there’s nothing gained from time spent online when conferences and meetings provide all that many scientists feel they need”.  - Brad Kruger, Labspaces.net

“Most networks seem to make two assumptions that doom them to failure: 1) that networking and communication is a central part of a scientist’s day, and 2) that scientists are willing to openly communicate on a wide scale with their communities. The first is a failure of perspective, those building and promoting social networks are “true-believers“, people whose lives revolve around social networking. While communication of results, networking and building collaboration are important for scientists, they’re somewhat peripheral compared to doing actual research.”  - via Scientists Still Not Joining Social Networks « The Scholarly Kitchen

Still, as I participated in my company’s annual meeting recently, I found myself thinking that the nature of certain social media platforms could be really effective for some of the goals we were establishing for 2010.  I found myself in a dilemma.   

Maybe I was looking at social media through the wrong filters?  I went back to the web for more research.  I found a fair amount of chatter like this and this related to the scientific community’s adoption of social networking, so the topic was clearly percolating in the scientific arena.  But, not surprisingly, I found very few of our competitors or suppliers participating in the space.   

So is the conclusion that social media simply doesn’t work for our industry, or that it is being underestimated?   

My premise is that it’s being underestimated.  Call me crazy, but instead of a dead end I see a tremendous opportunity.  Scientists and researchers may not be considered mainstream users today, but given the overall trends, I believe they will embrace social media in growing numbers.  And with the right plan, my company can get ahead of the curve by establishing a prominent position in our industry’s social space before it gets crowded.  

“Sites like Academia.edu are growing fast; we have over 61,000 profiles at the moment and are seeing exponential growth. I think the critical mass point for an academic networking site is around 500,000 to 1 million profiles; that is when growth will really accelerate.”  - Richard Price, Academia.edu

“Chris Gunter started to explore Twitter about a year ago, shortly after taking up her current position as director of research affairs at the HudsonAlpha Institute for Biotechnology in Huntsville, Alabama. ‘One thing that I have to do as part of my job is to communicate our science. I started to explore Twitter as a tool to do this, and I have seen a steady growth in followers.’ Her Twitter account, “girlscientist” (http://twitter.com/girlscientist), currently has close to 1000 followers.”    – via Cell – Should You Be Tweeting?#

“No one should even expect established scientists to give up their established processes for the new way of doing things. Architects didn’t throw out their drafting tables en masse when CAD programs came on the scene, and lawyers still keep legal libraries to this day, at great expense, when the legal databases are more up-to-date and easier to search. Perhaps I’m echoing a bit of Thomas Kuhn here, but new tools are used by the people who had them available as they were learning, and greater adoption comes from a greater number of these people getting into science, rather than a greater number of people already in science becoming those people.”  - via Why are we so impatient about new web technology? at Synthesis

If social media really is being underestimated, the question becomes:  how do I leverage social platforms to benefit a company whose customer base is largely composed of a population that currently isn’t considered a big user? 

Simple. 

Start small.  Involve the entire company in the social media plan.  Use social platforms to support a few specific company goals.  And concentrate on engaging those of our target populations that ARE using social media. 

Excited as I am about this opportunity, I must confess that I have a few concerns about leading my company into the social media space.  Namely that:

• We’ll turn off current or prospective customers with our social media presence (i.e., we are taken less seriously)
• Employees will stumble in the social space by either not participating or gaffing online
• Competitors will tap into our social media community to hijack ideas or identify customers
• We’ll give away competitive information in our effort to engage our community

But the driving force behind this project is my biggest fear:  that by hesitating we’ll miss the opportunity to create a landmark presence.  

I read more online content than I thought humanly possible to get to this point.   I’ve summarized  the key sources I used to make decisions about this initiative below, along with a brief description of their merit.  

LinkedIn
http://www.linkedin.com
LinkedIn will be the core platform for our social media initiative.  Though there are a fair number of social networking sites specifically for scientists, like this one and this one, LinkedIn provides us access to both our traditional and niche market populations in one place.  A quick search for “biotechnology research” on LinkedIn generates a list of 35,775 people overall, and 21,346 in the United States.  That’s just one broad category.  And even if only 10% of those numbers were relevant to our business, that’s a huge audience for our relatively small company.  LinkedIn will enable us to “listen” to our target population to understand their frustrations and needs (as related to our business).  Valuable information in our competitive market.  

The San Diego Biotechnology Network
http://sdbn.org/category/blog/ 
What led me to this site was a link to this slideshare presentation, “Social Media for Scientists.”  It provided great insight on how our customers might engage with social media, as well as ideas we can share with them about leveraging the platform for legitimate networking and research collaboration.  SDBN.org is dedicated to encouraging the San Diego biotechnology community to use social media, but the content transcends geography and discipline.  

ScienceBase
http://www.sciencebase.com
This site is maintained by David Bradley, who is a freelance science writer.  The site offers sci-tech articles, a blog, breaking news, and more.  I’ve found that Bradley is often cited in print and online in articles, forums, and blog posts.  He has compiled extensive lists of scientists using social media, including scientwists and science Twibe (scientists on twitter), and regularly writes about practical uses and application of social media for scientists and researchers.  

The Scholarly Kitchen
http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/
The blog site of the Society for Scholarly Publications.  Members of SSP “represent all aspects of scholarly publishing — including publishers, printers, e-products developers, technical service providers, librarians, and editors. SSP members come from a wide range of large and small commercial and nonprofit organizations.”   This group has a vested interest in tracking social media and networking trends in the scientific community — their livelihoods depend on understanding how their content providers and readers (scientists and researchers) publish and consume their information.   

ResearchGATE
http://www.researchgate.net
ResearchGATE is best described as a LinkedIn for scientists.  The site allows members to post their profiles, papers, research projects, interests, and skills to promote themselves and collaborate with others.  According to TechCrunch, “What makes ResearchGATE’s site useful is not only its ability to share documents but to be able to connect with scientists all over the world on issues of interest. By suggesting users with similar interests, the site does a lot of the networking work for users.”  The site’s semantic search engine drives the “suggestion” feature, and is what sets it apart from other scientist-centered social networks.   We can use our same LinkedIn strategy here, and it will be interesting to see what, if any, overlap we discover.  

The growing number of social networking sites targeting scientists
The fact that there are numerous networking sites for scientists like Mendeley, labmeeting, NatureNetwork, Laboratree, Scientist Solutions, and a host of others suggests that the scientific community is actually more social than they are given credit for.  In fact, the National Institutes of Health announced last week that is it creating what it calls “Facebook for Scientists.”  Despite the naysayers, though the scientific community may use social media differently than B2B populations, they are using it.   

Happily, my company has made a commitment to exploring social media.  Management is unanimously behind the initiative.  Employees are enthusiastic about the possibilities.  Now, to start small and begin to boldly go where few in our shoes have gone before, we just need to:  

1. Benchmark our current website traffic, SEO rankings, and service inquiries.  In order to gauge whether our social media initiative is having any impact, we must establish baselines in a few key areas.  We will also rely on feedback from individual reps on any impact they experience, either in recognition or actual sales, after we start using social networking. 
2. Communicate our social media strategy, goals, and guidelines.  Our “LinkedIn 101″ will explain the concept behind LinkedIn, why we are creating a presence on the network, and who employees might consider inviting to join their network.  It will also detail ways to properly leverage LinkedIn networks and communities to 1) build professional networks, 2) engage current customers, 3) get in front of new business opportunities, and 4) position the company as an expert in our field.  
3. Create LinkedIn profiles for the company and individual employees that communicate areas of expertise, scope of service, and innovative philosophy.  LinkedIn is familiar to most everyone, and is a non-threatening entry point to social networking.  We will develop LinkedIn profile templates to help employees get started in the network.  Employee profiles will contain consistent keywords to improve searchability and bind the company profiles together.   Our private company network will provide a safe environment for employees to get their LinkedIn bearings, and is the perfect platform for us to start building our internal brand.

Will we find success where others see only a wasteland?  Only time will tell.  I would love to hear from you if you have any experience with a similar situation.  Or if you think that my excitement has blinded me to obvious pitfalls. Or if you have any killer LinkedIn, Twitter, or other social networking tips.  In this case your feedback is golden, not your silence!

Nourish Your Creativity

I’m one of those people who watches the Superbowl as much (if not more) for the ads as the actual game.  So it’s no surprise to me that I’ve become slightly addicted to a very cool destination that I found in the Creative Realism blogroll. 

Ads of the World is a site that showcases an awesome array of campaigns that are executed in all kinds of media.  If you’re ever in need of creative inspiration, a lovely visual escape, or just a break from the usual lineup of funny (but largely inane) YouTube posts, I encourage you to check it out.    

It’s no surprise that author Brett Smith has given this site a slot in his blogroll.  His own site uses headers that showcase creative work that he finds interesting.  The bonus to the visuals is Brett’s commentary about the art he’s chosen.  I can’t tell you how many times I viewed the current header without “seeing” what was really there.  Thank goodness for Brett’s revealing explanation.  Did you get it the first time around?

You Can’t Remain Neutral on Net Neutrality

Backseat Broadband has been putting forth some really interesting stuff about the concept of Net neutrality, which is an issue that I had little awareness of (OK, no awareness) until recently. 

According to a post on the site today, “Net neutrality and the need for the US to adopt a national broadband policy are pretty electric items right now. There’s a lot out there; some of it good, some of it not. Some is charged with political leanings that pretty much dictate opinion instead of information.” 

Backseat Broadband is one of the good guys — doing a great job of delivering solid information without heavy-handed opinion.  I’ve found the site’s commentary regarding the neutrality issue to be fair, well-documented, and very educational.  Brian Bowman, the author of the site, is committed to the idea of keeping the Net open, but I get the feeling that he mostly just wants people to be aware of what’s going on, no matter which side of the fence they may end up on. 

I was inspired to learn more about Net neutrality after reading Backseat’s most recent post.  Among other information, I discovered this video that helped put the issue into even greater perspective for me.  And I’m happy to say that on Net neutrality, I’m no longer neutral!

Web Searches, Gatekeepers, and the Lemming Mentality

Earlier this year, Nicholas Carr declared the Web, Google, and Wikipedia our information triumvirate.  What does that mean, exactly, in this era of 24/7, all-access information consumption and production passes? 

It means, according to Carr, that the Internet has transformed from “a radically heterogeneous information source to a radically homogeneous one.”  This, despite a steady flood of new online participants and content producers every day.  What gives? 

Turns out that Google, the Internet’s ubiquitous search engine (read:  gatekeeper), and its search algorithms have created a bias for Wikipedia results.  And I, for one, daresay Wikipedia is not the end-all of information sources, web-based or otherwise. 

It all began back in 2006, when Carr decided to survey Wikipedia result rankings on Google. In his blog he wrote “Much has been made about the upward creep of Wikipedia entries in search engine results, but there hasn’t yet been much discussion about what this “centralization” means. Just to double-check the phenomenon, I wrote a list, off the top of my head, of ten important and various topics to see how highly Wikipedia’s entries would rank on Google.” 

He updated his survey on the same search terms each year, with the following results: 

	Wikipedia Result Rank in Google Search
	2006	2007	2008
World War II	1	1	1
Israel	1	1	1
George Washington	4	2	1
Genome	9	1	1
Agriculture	6	1	1
Herman Melville	3	1	1
Internet	5	1	1
Magna Carta	2	1	1
Evolution	3	1	1
Epilepsy	6	3	1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The take away?  Carr says it best (my emphasis added to his words). 

“What we seem to have here is evidence of a fundamental failure of the Web as an information-delivery service. Three things have happened, in a blink of history’s eye: (1) a single medium, the Web, has come to dominate the storage and supply of information, (2) a single search engine, Google, has come to dominate the navigation of that medium, and (3) a single information source, Wikipedia, has come to dominate the results served up by that search engine.

It’s hard to imagine that Wikipedia articles are actually the very best source of information for all of the many thousands of topics on which they now appear as the top Google search result. What’s much more likely is that the Web, through its links, and Google, through its search algorithms, have inadvertently set into motion a very strong feedback loop that amplifies popularity and, in the end, leads us all, lemminglike, down the same well-trod path – the path of least resistance.”

Hmmmmm.   I’ve never thought of myself as much of a lemming before reading Carr’s analysis.  But now I understand that faint music in the back of my head as I happily Google my way through the web . . . .  

Clearly, to make the most of all the web has to offer, we must pay attention to the subtle filters that shape our access and exposure to its vast pool of information resources.

BTW, Nicholas Carr’s most recent blog post is a rockin’ read for this week’s J-713 discussion re: email!

Social Evolution on the College Campus

I recently revisited socialmedia.edu, which is a blog written by one of my classmates.  The blog focuses on how social media can be used by colleges and universities to connect with and engage their student populations.  Social media and college students seem like a match made in heaven, and socialmedia.edu is becoming a great place to find interesting commentary and success stories about institutions that have embraced this union.   

Take for example this excerpt from the About This Blog section of the site:

Virginia Commonwealth University recently had an article on its website that discussed how it is using social media networks (e.g., Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter) to connect with its incoming freshman class.  Students were given the opportunity to connect with the campus by asking questions about campus life and other important matters they need to know.  Additionally, students were able to connect with their academic classes via the social media to start work on the University’s summer reading program.  What is interesting is that the response has been quite strong.  VCU has even created its own social network page proudly stating that “VCU wants to connect with you.”

This, to me, is exciting stuff.  I look forward to following the posts and research findings on this site!

SuperTarget© and the Internet

Looking for information on the Internet can be a little like going to SuperTarget©.  

You pop in for a four-pack of toilet paper, but one thing leads to another, and before you know it, it’s an hour and a half later and you’re leaving with a cart full of stuff you didn’t even realize you needed.   “New and improved” has to be better than what you used before, right?  That lampshade looked like it could be just the right blue for the guest room.  And how could you possibly pass up those great deals in the clearance section? 

With so many bright, sparkly, free bits of information just a quick click away, the Internet can be just as perilous as all those fully-stocked aisles at SuperTarget©.  Which means we can end up wasting a bunch of time clicking “just one more link,” or investing ourselves in sites that actually turn out to be a far less than what was promised. 

The other extreme is completely avoiding the temptations and potential time-waste of extracurricular searches by having all your information delivered to your digital doorstep using RSS feeds, twitter, Google alerts, and the like.  Sounds convenient, but I think there’s an inherent danger in this sort of passive information consumption.  Your world view, confined to a limited set of voices and channels, will eventually become skewed – no matter how great your sources are to begin with. 

The middle ground is to find a good set of trusted online sites (for me, that includes TED and Social Media Today) and sources (like individual authors and bloggers) to help you navigate the mass of information on the web.  Google certainly has its place, but use your go-to sites as more refined information filters and springboards for content.  And no matter how much you trust a certain authority, don’t automatically assume that a single post is the last word on a particular topic. Be responsible (to yourself!) and check out the writer’s credentials and information sources, and take a look at what others are saying about the same thing.  The web has a funny way of masking complete frauds, and making even outrageous information somehow seem legit.  We’re only human, and our gullible gene seems to exert itself at the most inappropriate times. 

This page posted by UC Berkeley is a great primer for performing web searches and evaluating online information.  Yes, some of it seems like flashes of the obvious, but it doesn’t hurt to be reminded of the simple things that can make all the difference. 

BTW, I happen to LOVE SuperTarget©, but have learned it’s best for me to visit with blinders on and an iron-clad list in hand!

Ups and Downs of Creating a Blogroll

Part of our recent assignment was to create a blogroll.  Seemed simple enough – just adding some URLs to the Links section of my blog, right?  Technically, yes.  Practically, no.  

The hard part was defining which sites were worthy of blogroll status.  After all, wouldn’t the world judge me by how useful and insightful my blogroll references were?  Oh, the pressure! 

What I’ve found is that little by little I’m learning what to look for in a site to determine its worth.  It’s not enough for a site to show up at the top of a search list or to be recommended by someone I respect.  It has to be a site whose content and voice I genuinely connect with.  That I enjoy navigating.  And that expands my knowledge by presenting information that makes me think about topics in a new way. 

I’ve added and deleted entries to my blogroll since its inception to include newly discovered sites and to drop those that didn’t turn out to be so great upon further inspection.  I like having a spot to share the gems I’ve found online, and have created separate sections for my fellow class bloggers, my research resources, and just plain ol’ cool links I’ve come across while surfing.  

Having a blogroll is a great incentive for ongoing research and thoughtful analysis of online information.  I can also see how it’s somewhat of a burden for the blogger.  But I imagine that active bloggers would naturally have active blogrolls – surely there’s always something new that’s worth linking to? That’s a question I can’t answer yet since I’m so new to blogging.  Perhaps I’ll revisit this post after I’ve been around for awhile to see if I’ve imagined correctly.

 As for now, I’m off to update my blogroll with my latest and greatest finds!

 

PS:  thanks to David B. Fankhauser, Ph.D., Professor of Biology and Chemistry, University of Cincinnati Clermont College, for the schnecken sweet roll image!