{"id":12263,"date":"2014-11-11T10:33:03","date_gmt":"2014-11-11T18:33:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.preposterousuniverse.com\/blog\/?p=12263"},"modified":"2014-11-11T10:33:03","modified_gmt":"2014-11-11T18:33:03","slug":"unsolicited-advice-becoming-a-science-communicator","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/preposterousuniverse.com\/blog\/2014\/11\/11\/unsolicited-advice-becoming-a-science-communicator\/","title":{"rendered":"Unsolicited Advice: Becoming a Science Communicator"},"content":{"rendered":"

Everyone who does science inevitably has “communicating” as part of their job description, even if they’re only communicating with their students and professional colleagues. But many people start down a trajectory of becoming a research scientist, only to discover that it’s the communicating that they are most passionate about. And some of those people might want to take the dramatic step of earning a living<\/em> doing such communication, whether it’s traditional journalism or something more new-media focused.<\/p>\n

So: how does one make the transition from researcher to professional science communicator? Heck if I know. I do a lot of communicating, but it’s not my primary job. You’d be better off looking at this thread from Ed Yong<\/a>, where he coaxed an impressive number of science writers into telling their origin stories. But lack of expertise has never stopped me from offering advice!<\/p>\n

First piece of advice: don’t make the tragic mistake of looking at science communication as a comfortable safety net if academia doesn’t work out. Not only is it an extremely demanding career, but it’s one that is at least as hard as research in terms of actually finding reliable employment — and the career trajectories are far more chancy and unpredictable. There is no tenure for science communicators, and there’s not even a structured path of the form student \u2192 postdoc \u2192 faculty. Academia’s “up or out” system can be soul-crushing, but so can the “not today, but who knows? Maybe tomorrow!” path to success of the professional writer. It’s great to aspire to being Neil deGrasse Tyson<\/a> or Mary Roach<\/a>, but most science communicators don’t reach that level of success, just as most scientists don’t become Marie Curie or Albert Einstein.<\/p>\n

Having said all that, here are some tips that might be worth sharing. <\/p>\n

First: there’s no need to wait. If you think\/wonder\/suspect that science communication might be for you, then start communicating! Dive into the ecosystem that already exists online, and start participating in the conversation. The good news is, the internet revolution has greatly multiplied the ways one can be a working “science communicator.” The bad news is, it has greatly the diminished the number of traditional science-journalist staff jobs at newspapers and magazines and TV\/radio outlets. But, you know, chaos is a ladder<\/a>. Find the intersection of your passions and your talents with what people might somehow pay you to do, and get cracking. <\/p>\n

At the very least, you need a Twitter<\/a> account, and you should start following (and responding to, and retweeting) some scientists\/communicators you think are interesting. And of course adding your own voice! It can be overwhelming, but here are some lists of folks on Twitter (of course with my obvious physics bias):<\/p>\n