,
4 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
My science-policy students had to follow 10 scientists on twitter for the semester and report out what they thought worked well and what was ineffective for reaching a broad audience. There were some common findings. They followed ~90 different scientists. #scicomm
Worked well:
When posting a paper link, including an accessible 1 sentence punchline for the paper.
Responding to questions in a respectful manner.
Photos & images to solidify the point
Retweeting/discussing science from other researchers
Addressing topical issues
When posting a paper link, including an accessible 1 sentence punchline for the paper.
Responding to questions in a respectful manner.
Photos & images to solidify the point
Retweeting/discussing science from other researchers
Addressing topical issues
Worked poorly:
Using jargon
Tweeting paper link accompanied only with - here is my new paper...
Not responding to sincere questions
Politics and not science
Only responding to other scientists
Being disrespectful in their responses
No context for comments
Using jargon
Tweeting paper link accompanied only with - here is my new paper...
Not responding to sincere questions
Politics and not science
Only responding to other scientists
Being disrespectful in their responses
No context for comments
My favorite one-off comments about what worked poorly:
Excessively promoting the book they wrote
Being too goofy or sarcastic
Too many # or ALL CAPS
Excessively promoting the book they wrote
Being too goofy or sarcastic
Too many # or ALL CAPS
