There’s a big meeting (5th annual) about science and the web, Science Online 2011, which will start in a few hours in the Research Triangle Area of North Carolina. Good news! Those of us unable to attend in person will be able to view livestream presentations or the webcasts will be available later when they’ve been archived. All of this is courtesy of the National Association of Science Writers (NASW).

I have long wanted to attend this conference and here’s why (from their About page),

ScienceOnline2011 is the fifth annual international meeting on Science and the Web. On January 13-15th, 2011 [NOTE: The programme lists Jan. 13  – 16, 2011 as the dates] the Research Triangle area of North Carolina will once again host scientists, students, educators, physicians, journalists, librarians, bloggers, programmers and others interested in the way the World Wide Web is changing the way science is communicated, taught and done.

Here’s a sampling from their programme page,

Saturday, January 15th: 10:15-11:15am

Experiments with the imagination: science and scientists through the medium of fiction – Jennifer Rohn and Blake Stacey

Can we stimulate a wider interest in and appreciation of scientists and what they do via the medium of mainstream fiction, whether be it novels, plays, movies or TV dramas? And how can we leverage online tools to help? Is it possible to entertain and educate without becoming too pedantic or pedagogical, and how do we define “scientific accuracy” in the context of made-up stories? This session will explore the world of imaginary science and how we can leverage its powers without compromising our scientific principles.

Saturday, January 15th: 11:30am-12:30pm

The Entertainment Factor – Communicating Science with Humor – Brian Malow and Joanne Manaster

How do we find a balance between education and entertainment? When reaching out to the public, how do you increase the fun factor and audience engagement without diluting the science? There seems to be growing interest in this question and awareness that some science programming is too dry or boring. But, even though Brian is an entertainer, he is not a fan of much of what passes for science on television. In a lot of flashy programs, there’s really no interesting science content at all. Let’s talk about this and related issues.

Saturday, January 15th: 2:00pm-3:00pm

Blogs, Bloggers and Boundaries? – Marie-Claire Shanahan, Alice Bell, Ed Yong, Martin Robbins and Viv Raper

Science blogging is often seen as an opportunity for science and science communication to be made more open and in doing so, help connect people. Blogging thus might be seen as a chance to break down cultural boundaries between science, science journalists, and various people formerly known as audiences. But do these traditional roles still affect blogs, bloggers and their readers? Are blogs still producing a rather traditional form of popular science, one that largely disseminates knowledge, maintaining a boundary between those who are knowledgeable and those who are not? Or do they provide new opportunities for these boundaries to be blurred? Similarly, do blogs help foster cross-disciplinary communication or simply allow bloggers to keep talking to ever more niche audiences? They allow science writers to connect with more people, but do they end up as an echo chamber where writers only talk to more of the same people? And how can bloggers tell if their writing is actually making a difference? This discussion will explore the boundaries that are maintained and blurred through science blogging, including the value of some of these boundaries and the importance of being aware of them.

Saturday, January 15th: 3:15pm-4:15pm

Science-Art: The burgeoning fields of niche artwork aimed at scientific disciplines – Glendon Mellow, David Orr and John Hawks

* Is science-inspired art a new zeitgeist, or just cyclical?

* An overview of science’s influence in art history, and how the internet changes its influence.

* What makes something “science art” anyway? How does it differ from fantasy or scientific illustration?

* Dinosaurs. Hominids/archaeological reconstruction. Space art (how about those NASA animations, do they count?)

* Also, how is online altering the dynamic?

How to explain science in blog posts – Scicurious, Joanne Manaster, Maryn McKenna, Vivienne Raper, Eric Michael Johnson, Brian Mossop, Carin Bondar, Melody Dye, Christie Wilcox, Ed Yong and the engaged audience.

Many science bloggers dream about attracting a mass audience, but what’s the secret to popular and readable blogposts? Do you have to write about orgasms, duck sex and dinosaurs or are there other ways to draw a crowd? This session will discuss how to make your blog an effective tool for getting the public excited about science… and masturbating squirrels.

Saturday, January 15th: 4:45pm-5:45pm

Video: from YouTube to TV to Hollywood and back: Mini Science Film Festival- Joanne Manaster and Carin Bondar

What are some of the best science videos on the internet? Who is making them and how are they doing it? We will provide a screening of several of our favorites and open the floor for discussion of what works and what doesn’t. What kind of science topics/stories make for great video presentations? Which bloggers are using video posts, and what kinds of techniques do they employ? What is the future of video production and science?

Demos:

1) I’m a Scientist, Get me out of Here! 60% of school students taking part in I’m a Scientist visit the site at home, in their own time, after doing it in class. How do you make science engagement fun, and engage students who aren’t usually interested in science? We’ll show you how IAS works, and why. (Sophia Collins)

2) Blogging with the invisible community and why it might matter – Project Exploration’s blog, blogging strategy with students; blogging about science as a way to get and keep youth and girls from historically underrepresented populations involved with science and scientists. (Gabrielle Lyon)

3) N.C.Zoo (Russ Williams and Mark MacAllister) – Highlight several NC Zoo Education programs, including FieldTripEarth, the conservation education website operated by the North Carolina Zoological Society.

Sunday, January 16th: 9:00am-10:00am

Talking mathematics on blogs and wikis! – Blake Stacey and Maria Droujkova

Using computer programming and simulations as educational tools! We had a great time chatting over these things last year, even though we were stuck in the little room behind the coat closet. Since then, the Math 2.0 interest group grew, and several people are eager to run some math sessions at the conference. Online math communities is the topic.

Sunday, January 16th:11:30am-12:30pm

Communicating Science. Have you ever wondered, “What the hell’s the point?” – Darlene Cavalier

Bloggers, journalists, educators, policymakers and (sometimes) scientists are taking great strides to inform the public of the latest, greatest scientific breakthroughs. Academic fields have sprung up to study best practices and increase “public understanding of science” with the hope of creating a scientifically literate populace. While this is all helpful in delivering tools needed to understand the world, or, in many cases, simply for pure edutainment, did you ever wonder if your motivated (“non expert”) readers could do more with the news and information you’re providing? Otherwise, what the hell’s the point? There are, indeed, efforts underway to harness the power of an informed citizenry to shape science and science policies via citizen science and participatory technology assessment efforts, to name two emerging activities. But more can be done to give purpose to your work. Getting the public from here (passive sponges) to there (actively engaged participants) requires work. Whose responsibility is that? Yours. Mine. Ours. We’ll explore all of this and more, including a brief (entertaining) look at of some of the unorthodox methods the Science Cheerleader uses to turn “average” folks onto science.

Web 2.0, public and private spaces in the scientific community, and generational divides in the practice of science – Janet Stemwedel and Helene Andrews-Polymenis

I was at a meeting of NSF PIs, trainees, and program officers back in May to talk about how blogging might fit into scientific work/training, and became aware of a huge generational divide on the appropriateness of the use of “new technologies” of all sorts. The divide can best be summed up in the words of a PI who said (to students at the meeting talking about their use of such technologies), “Why is it that your generation feels compelled to do in public what the rest of us know to do in private?” I think this is a HUGE issue in the practice of science (and one with interesting epistemological and ethical issues). Would love to see someone from The Third Reviewer participating in this one, as well as some open notebook/open science folks, and possibly folks blogging about what it’s like to lead a scientific life. Would also welcome a designated curmudgeon to stand up for the old ways.

Sunday, January 16th:2:00pm-3:00pm

Blogging networks and the emerging science communications ecosystem – Arikia Millikan (Wired), Brian Mossop (PLoS), Bora Zivkovic (Scientific American and ScienceInTheTriangle), SciCurious (Scientopia), Amos Zeeberg (Discover), Lou Woodley (Nature Network), Martin Robbins (Guardian and Lay Scientist), Andrew Thaler (the Gam), Mark Hahnel (science3point0), Craig McClain (Deep Sea News), Brian Krueger (LabSpaces), Rachel Pepling (CENtral Science), Alok Jha (the Guardian), Leslie Taylor (Talking Science), Richard P. Grant (Occam’s Typewriter), Maria Jose Vinas (AGU network, via Skype), Eva Amsen (the Node, via Skype)….

A round-table with editors and community managers of blogging networks and big group-blogs in “hot seats”, audience asks questions, gives suggestions, criticisms, etc. What’s the (changing) role of an online editor on a site aggregating independent blogs? “Merely” a bloggers’ assistant for bug fixes and spam busting or a signposter to content, online marketer, creator of community or what? How closely do you monitor your community’s behaviour? Do you know visit times/bounce rates/preferred pages for all your archive and how easy is it to predict what will be “good” (high traffic?) content? Do you encourage “basics posts” and “explainers”? Do you worry if posts are not “newsy” enough?

There is much, much more and I tried to bring it all here but the word count got ridiculous.