Reseñas proporcionadas por Syndetics

Library Journal Review

Goldsmith, director of the International Science Policy Foundation and editor of Science and Public Policy, addresses society's need for professional analysis of scientific methods and goals along with the costs and benefits derived from the work of scientists. Criticizing science is not the same as merely reporting science; rather it involves developing and communicating an overall outlook and a cohesive set of objectives. Criticism, Goldsmith asserts, can promote a public understanding of science as well as an appreciation of its impact. He proposes the need for a new profession of science critic in order to bridge the gap between scientists and the public, and to help bring science and technology under public control. Suitable for specialists and general audiences. Hilary D. Burton, Lawrence Livermore National Lab., Livermore, Cal. (c) Copyright 2010. Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.

CHOICE Review

We live and conduct our activities in a ``media culture,'' writes Goldsmith, director of the International Science Policy Foundation (London). In this book he attempts to explain how this culture has influenced science, and what can be done about it. Scientists are frequently frustrated and annoyed by the manner in which their work is reported in the mass media, while the public feels a sense of inadequacy about the routine presentation of science. Goldsmith's thesis is that for the major media the translation of science from the language of the laboratory can occur only under conditions laid down by the ``media culture.'' Each medium has its own grammar essential for the language used by its particular communicators. He explains the techniques of the ``media culture,'' makes a case for a new kind of science critic for the media, and ends with examples of the ``right kind'' of media presentations of science. These are essays (several by Goldsmith) but unfortunately they are not really examples of the kind of essays that would be used by newspapers, radio, TV, or film. Most of the specifics and examples are British rather than American. The book is probably more useful as an explanation of mass media to scientists than as an explanation of science to mass communicators. But it would certainly be essential to anyone seriously interested in science writing.-R.E. Hiebert, University of Maryland at College Park