From an editorial in this week's Nature:
Indeed, researchers would do well to blog more than they do. The experience of journals such as Cell and PLoS ONE,
which allow people to comment on papers online, suggests that
researchers are very reluctant to engage in such forums. But the
blogosphere tends to be less inhibited, and technical discussions there
seem likely to increase.Moreover, there are
societal debates that have much to gain from the uncensored voices of
researchers. A good blogging website consumes much of the spare time of
the one or several fully committed scientists that write and moderate
it. But it can make a difference to the quality and integrity of public
discussion.
This is a remarkably strong and considered endorsement of blogging from a major journal - a promising sign.
more viable in fields like econ & computer science where preprints float around for discussion for years.
I know you (Daniel) are aware of this, but perhaps others who read your blog are not. There are many scientists blogging regularly at Scientist Solutions (http://www.scientistsolutions.com/science-blog.aspx). Not much in the area of genomics, but the blogroll is growing.
Cheers,
Ryan
I say everyone go comment on a PLoS ONE paper now. Why? Because you can.
I suspect that concerns over funding and acceptance would cause researchers to censor themselves quite heavily even if they blogged.
Just because conversations are semi-private, or not made in an official capacity, doesn't mean they can't destroy someone's career.
And I was looking forward to a nice relaxing evening. Now Nature says I have to blog? Well, if they say so...