Everand Logo

Welcome to Everand!

  • Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

    Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

    Unavailable
    Don't Be Such a Scientist: Talking Substance in an Age of Style
    Unavailable
    Don't Be Such a Scientist: Talking Substance in an Age of Style
    Unavailable
    Don't Be Such a Scientist: Talking Substance in an Age of Style
    Ebook304 pages4 hours

    Don't Be Such a Scientist: Talking Substance in an Age of Style

    By Randy Olson

    3.5/5

    ()

    Currently unavailable

    Currently unavailable

    About this ebook

    After nearly a decade on the defensive, the world of science is about to be restored to its rightful place. But is the American public really ready for science? And is the world of science ready for the American public? Scientists wear ragged clothes, forget to comb their hair, and speak in a language that even they don't understand. Or so people think. Mscientists don't care how they are perceived, but in our media-dominated age, style points count.
    Enter Randy Olson. Fifteen years ago, Olson bid farewell to the science world and shipped off to Hollywood ready to change the world. With films like Flock of Dodos: The Evolution-IntelligDesign Circus (Tribeca '06, Showtime) and Sizzle: A Global Warming Comedy (Outfest '08), he has tried to bridge the cultural divide that has too often left science on the outside looking in.
    Now, in his first book, Olson, with a Harvard Ph.D. and formerly a tenured professor of marine biology at the University of New Hampshire, recounts the lessons from his own hilarious-and at times humiliating-evolution from science professor to Hollywood filmmaker. In Don't Be Such a Scientist, he shares the secrets of talking substance in an age of style. The key, he argues, is to stay true to the facts while tapping into something more primordial, more irrational, and ultimately more human.
    In a book enlivened by a profane acting teacher who made Olson realize that "nobody wants to watch you think," he offers up serious insights and poignant stories. You'll laugh, you may cry, and as a communicator you'll certainly learn the importance of not only knowing how to fulfill, but also how to arouse.
    LanguageEnglish
    PublisherIsland Press
    Release dateMay 17, 2010
    ISBN9781597267960
    Unavailable
    Don't Be Such a Scientist: Talking Substance in an Age of Style
    Author

    Randy Olson

    Randy Olson earned his Ph.D. at Harvard University and achieved tenure at the University of New Hampshire before resigning and moving to Hollywood, obtaining an M.F.A. from the University of Southern California School of Cinema, and embarking on a second career as a filmmaker. Since film school he has written and directed the critically acclaimed films Flock of Dodos: The Evolution-Intelligent Design Circus (Tribeca, '06, Showtime) and Sizzle: A Global Warming Comedy (Outfest, '08), and co-founded The Shifting Baselines Ocean Media Project, a partnership between scientists and Hollywood to communicate the crisis facing our oceans.

    Read more from Randy Olson

    Related to Don't Be Such a Scientist

    Related ebooks

    Business Communication For You

    View More
    View More

    Related podcast episodes

    Related articles

    • Article

      How Not To Feed The World

      Aug 10, 2021

      Imagine you live by the Atlantic Ocean, close enough to hear the waves breaking. In those waters swim small fish. They are a superfood: rich in the nutrients needed by your bodies – and those of your children. But these fish are destined for the diet

      1 min read

    • Article

      Roberto Benigni

      Aug 21, 2020

      Roberto Benigni
      2 min read

    • Article

      Otherlands Author Thomas Halliday: ‘Some People Have Insisted On Reading The Book Backwards’

      Jan 28, 2023

      Thomas Halliday was born in 1989 and raised in Rannoch in the Scottish Highlands. He studied zoology at Cambridge before specialising in paleobiology for his master’s and PhD – winning the Linnean Society Medal for the best doctorate in biological st

      4 min read

    • Article

      How Water Can Make Us Well

      Jan 6, 2020

      How Water Can Make Us Well
      3 min read

    • Article

      An Ode to Small Talk

      Sep 13, 2020

      An Ode to Small Talk
      1 min read

    • Article

      Lessons For The Future

      Mar 11, 2021

      Lessons For The Future
      7 min read

    • Article

      Simplistic Solutions

      Nov 26, 2018

      Simplistic Solutions
      2 min read

    • Article

      The Future Is Fluid

      Jan 12, 2022

      The Future Is Fluid
      7 min read

    • Article

      New Old Solutions

      May 5, 2020

      New Old Solutions
      1 min read

    • Article

      Inside the Waiting

      Mar 8, 2022

      SHE SITS ACROSS from us, the middle-aged Black woman in the orange vinyl-upholstered chair, her eyes red and swollen, gripping a tissue that has been disintegrating for the last two hours into bits of dust that dot her pants and the floor beneath her

      3 min read

    • Article

      Not the Perfect Victim

      Aug 30, 2019

      Not the Perfect Victim
      21 min read

    • Article

      Now Listen Up, Me

      Jan 7, 2021

      Now Listen Up, Me
      2 min read

    • Article

      ‘We Are Living Inside The Dreams Of Dead Pe

      Dec 5, 2022

      Good news. You are a superhero. We all are. But instead of being able to fly or become invisible, the superpower that sets us above the rest of life on earth is the ability to tell stories. This is the central argument of historian Yuval Noah Harari’

      5 min read

    • Article

      I’m So Much BOLDER Now!

      May 13, 2020

      I’m So Much BOLDER Now!
      4 min read

    • Article

      Why Forests Give You Awe

      Oct 19, 2018

      Why Forests Give You Awe
      2 min read

    • Article

      Society

      Oct 20, 2022

      China will step up efforts to cultivate a highly skilled work-force to boost the country’s core competitiveness and optimize employment. By the end of the 14th Five-Year Plan (2021-25) period, the policy support and cultivation system for highly skil

      3 min read

    Reviews for Don't Be Such a Scientist

    3.5/5

    33 ratings12 reviews

    What did you think?

    Tap to rate

    Review must be at least 10 words

    • 4/5
      A (entertaining) book that covers science communication from a "to the masses" and "film" perspective, rather than e.g. "how to prepare for an interview" perspective. While at times I felt it focused too much on the medium of film, it is hard to overstate the importance of film (including 'videos' of all types) for mass communication, I just think I cam slightly biased against it. That said, I felt that just about everything here is relevant, whether talking about film or not, and whether talking about communicating directly to a mass audience or only indirectly.
    • 4/5
      A fair summation of why many scientists are inadequate communicators and reasonable recommendations on how they might improve. A quick read, but rather author-centric.
    • 4/5
      Randy Olson deserves an applaud on this eye-opening and sincere (although thoroughly optimistic) account of talking substance in an ever regressing (to the mean, that is) public debate of global change, environmental issues, money issues and culture.
      I wish everybody had embraced scientific reasoning along with witty humour and a flair for the arts the way Randy Olson does.
    • 4/5
      One of the most memorable lectures I have ever experienced was given by Nobelist Willard Libby. He spoke at University of California, Irvine in 1968 or 1969, but the essence of his talk about the atmosphere of Venus is still fresh in my mind because he told such an engaging, entertaining story. While it turned out that his conclusion (that there ought to be ice caps on Venus nearly five miles thick) was completely erroneous, the weaving of the evidence through narrative is what made his argument stick with me all these years. Filmmaker Randy Olson's perspective on science for the public is also that of a storyteller, and he has a lot to teach us about how science should be presented. He advises us to meet our audience on their own turf and with persuasion rather than argument from authority. If you want to see an example of his work on creationism and "intelligent" design, seek out a copy of his documentary video, "Flock of Dodos" on DVD. It is one of the fairest treatments I have seen. I haven't yet viewed his film on climate change, "Sizzle: A Global Warming Comedy", but I intend to do so soon.
    • 4/5
      Randy Olson is a marine biologist who did his research, did his publishing, and became a tenured professor at the University of New Hampshire.

      And then he resigned to become a filmmaker.

      In Don't Be Such a Scientist, Olson talks about his own journey from scientist to science filmmaker, and explores the problems of communicating science to a broad audience. He finds the problems to lie mainly in a disconnect between how scientists learn to communicate with each other and the kinds of communication that work with the general, non-scientist public, and especially what does and does not work in the mass media.

      Scientists place the highest value on accuracy; they correct inaccuracies, they question assumptions, they demand evidence. This is all vital to what scientists do; without these behaviors, real advances in knowledge can't happen. But when scientists use those same behaviors when talking to the general public, and especially when speaking on tv or making films and videos intended to reach the general public, these same behaviors come across as negative, argumentative, and unlikeable. Scientists, Olson says, work almost entirely in their heads, while reaching a broad audience--even getting the attention of a broad audience, due to how inundated we are with information--requires reaching the heart, the gut, and even, as he delicately phrases it, "the lower organs."

      To illustrate the impact of an over-emphasis on being serious and relentlessly accurate, vs. presenting the information with style, heart, and even humor, he compares the reception given to two 2006 movies about global warming--HBO's April 2006 Too Hot Not Too Handle, and Al Gore's May 2006 An Inconvenient Truth. The first, he says, was "solid, relatively impersonal, objective effort featuring interviews with many top scientists." The second is a personal narrative by Al Gore, featuring his stories of long-term involvement with the issue, the tragedies involving his sister and his son, some humor, along with lots of substance. With all the emphasis on style, Gore nevertheless used PowerPoint graphs in abundance to communicate facts and data.

      The HBO movie was completely accurate--but also boring and depressing. It sunk without a trace. Gore's was filled with important information, but had some inaccuracies that would never have survived in the HBO effort. But none of those errors were important enough to undermine the central point--and An Inconvenient Truth was a huge hit, and won both an Oscar and a Nobel Prize. Which was more effective in getting real knowledge of global warming to the general public?

      Some of the entertaining stories Olson has to tell include his own collision with acting class (news flash: scientists are not naturals at just going with their feelings), the struggles to make his own 2006 film on evolution vs. "intelligent design," Flock of Dodos, watchable--and then the reaction of science bloggers to a movie that still wasn't accessible enough for distributors to want it for general audiences.

      I'm not doing justice to the book, but it's short, pithy, and completely readable, along with providing ample food for thought on how to communicate science to the general public.

      Important note: I received a free electronic galley of this book from the publisher, Island Press.
    • 5/5
      Former scientist and current documentary film maker (best known for A Flock of Dodos) Randy Olson brings us important lessons in communication in his book. Don't Be Such A Scientist. The title, taken from an admonishment from his ex-wife over his scientist-tendency to over-analyze and focus on substance over style sums up this book nicely. Olson takes us on his journey from a tenured professor through giving it all up to take an acting class in Hollywood (put on by what sounds to be a truly dreadful teacher) to his lessons-learned in crafting entertaining documentaries that appeal to mass audiences if not grizzled scientists.Olson's primary message in this book is that science in general has an image problem. The failure to address this has allowed insane nonsense such as "intelligent design" and other fundamentalist nutjobbery to gain traction in the public mindset. As a result, true science doesn't resonate with the masses, and when it comes time for public funding, important programs find themselves on the chopping block.Olson teaches us about the history of science communication. The bunker mentality that many (about 1/3) scientists uphold is a modern, post-WW2 phenomenon. Prior to this, scientists were often popular speakers and adept at telling people why their work was important. There are certainly parallels in modern times: as examples, Olson holds up the late greats Carl Sagan and Stephen Jay Gould, as well as the still very much alive Neil Degrasse Tyson. (all three personal heroes of mine). While Olson's chosen medium is film, his message equally applies to books and public lectures.For every subject, there are two audiences: the public and other scientists. Whether a sterile stream of just the facts might not even be the best way to communicate with other scientists, all of them are accustomed to it, and 1/3 will stand for nothing else. Few outside the discipline are going to enjoy, much less assimilate and retain information provided in this manner. Using Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth as an example, entertaining documentaries can be highly effective and popular forms of communication, even if the message is slightly tampered with in the process.I can't find fault with any of Olson's premises. It's something I try to do in communicating technical information, and I appreciate it when others make an effort to be entertaining as well as educational. I like watching documentaries and reading about science, but I like being entertained too. A dense book that is hard to choke down is not a pleasant experience and much of that painstaking detail will not be retained. Similarly, a droning documentary that fails to engage on a more visceral level might have me distracted, possibly reading that difficult book at the same time.Olson characterizes this as four different zones where a message can be targeted: Head, Heart, Gut and, well, Groin. This happens to be the order of appeal -- a sexy message will appeal to the broadest range while an intellectual one the most narrow. The most effective communications will target several or all of these zones.There are a few affable scientists carrying their message to the masses. Tyson, among others, are regular guests on talk shows. We need many more of them if the US is to regain and retain a reputation as a world leader in science and research. Olson tells us why and provides direction to those who wish to carry the torch and push back the tide of ignorance.
    • 3/5
      This has been on my to-read list for ages, and now that it's semi-relevant to grad school goals, finally took it off my amazon wishlist. I watched Flock of Dodos during Darwin Week 2010; my review of that is here. Curiously, my opinions of his other work reflect what I got four years later in his book.

      Dr. Olson argues that since we live in a world of short-attention spans, scientists need to learn to let go of some of the jargon and embrace subjective emotional/sexual/whatever appeal. Arouse the audience, pique their interest, and they'll follow you to your message. It's important for science communication, and here, nearly five years later there's a proliferation of science communication workshops, courses, etc. (I wonder if Randy ever goes to ScienceOnline in Raleigh?)

      While his ideas are good, I'm not going to give it a full 4-5 stars because a good portion seemed to be writing out his disappointment in the blogger community on rejecting Sizzle (which I have yet to see). Science blogs are what drew me towards the world of SciComm, and while there are those who are considerably abrasive (PZ Myers, for example), there are many excellent writers out there (Carl Zimmer, Brian Switek, the Deep Sea News team, etc.) who talk about cool things in the science world without getting condescending (I would definitely have a beer with any of them).

      Still, readers should take away from this that it's not just what you say, but how you say it that matters. One of Randy's points from Flock of Dodos is that the Intelligent Design movement is full of buzzwords and as I put it at the time, "shiny wrappers" that make it seem like a palatable product. When Bill Nye debated the legitimacy of Intelligent Design with Ken Ham last month, a sizable number in the science community felt it would be validating a worthless idea by even showing up. However, it was watched by millions, and brought Bill's joy in the scientific method to households that would otherwise never be exposed to critical thinking. Sure, Bill's an engineer and didn't have all the technical details right, but he's insanely relatable and easily communicates these big ideas. The reboot of Cosmos by Neil deGrasse Tyson also shares this enthusiasm over science without talking down to the audience. Get rid of the Ivory Tower, and share what you love!
    • 5/5
      Randy Olson, the author, has unique life lessons on communication to share with academia after resigning from a tenured position at University of New Hampshire and subsequently moving to Hollywood to begin a second career as a (science) movie maker. His book on communicating science focuses on the principles, rather than the techniques, of how to effectively reach broad audiences through video and how different this is from traditional scientific communication training. This is not a how-to book. It's purpose is to convince scientists of the necessity of communicating better, and to point out just how big the gulf between the scientific community and 'the masses' really is, and why outreach and talking to 'the public' has thus far been ineffective. In a conversational first person tone, he talks about different ways to connect and communicate with an audience - through the head (eg information dump), the heart (eg religion), the gut (eg humor), and the sex organs (is an eg necessary?). He also talks about ways that scientists can learn to better connect with folks - by being less cerebral, less literal, more likeable, etc. It is somewhat ironic that he spends ample time discussing how negative and negating the scientific community can be yet many of his messages are 'Don't do x' (Perhaps he thought scientists would naturally gravitate towards this type of advice?) In any case, he argues that communicating better - and through media - can be learned like most other things scientists do. Further, he maintains that learning to do so is critical to maintain public support (both directly and via government) for scientists and science that can help to improve society.Drawing on lessons from acting classes and from movie making experience, Olson both his successes and his failures and turning points along his scientist-turn-Hollywood career. This is a worthwhile read, particularly if you are skeptical about the usefulness and power of communicating science to a wide audience or if you are unsure how communicating science to non-scientists is different from communicating to scientists.There's a fair bit to chew over that's subjective, opinion, and anecdotal, but considering that Dr. Olson is one of the few who have walked the talk, I think it's worthwhile to hear him out. And at the very least, it may be entertaining. Recommended, 4.5 stars.
    • 5/5
      Randy Olson, the author, has unique life lessons on communication to share with academia after resigning from a tenured position at University of New Hampshire and subsequently moving to Hollywood to begin a second career as a (science) movie maker. His book on communicating science focuses on the principles, rather than the techniques, of how to effectively reach broad audiences through video and how different this is from traditional scientific communication training. This is not a how-to book. It's purpose is to convince scientists of the necessity of communicating better, and to point out just how big the gulf between the scientific community and 'the masses' really is, and why outreach and talking to 'the public' has thus far been ineffective. In a conversational first person tone, he talks about different ways to connect and communicate with an audience - through the head (eg information dump), the heart (eg religion), the gut (eg humor), and the sex organs (is an eg necessary?). He also talks about ways that scientists can learn to better connect with folks - by being less cerebral, less literal, more likeable, etc. It is somewhat ironic that he spends ample time discussing how negative and negating the scientific community can be yet many of his messages are 'Don't do x' (Perhaps he thought scientists would naturally gravitate towards this type of advice?) In any case, he argues that communicating better - and through media - can be learned like most other things scientists do. Further, he maintains that learning to do so is critical to maintain public support (both directly and via government) for scientists and science that can help to improve society.Drawing on lessons from acting classes and from movie making experience, Olson both his successes and his failures and turning points along his scientist-turn-Hollywood career. This is a worthwhile read, particularly if you are skeptical about the usefulness and power of communicating science to a wide audience or if you are unsure how communicating science to non-scientists is different from communicating to scientists.There's a fair bit to chew over that's subjective, opinion, and anecdotal, but considering that Dr. Olson is one of the few who have walked the talk, I think it's worthwhile to hear him out. And at the very least, it may be entertaining. Recommended, 4.5 stars.
    • 4/5
      This book is a good deconstruction on how we communicate with each other in the modern media. And how very central and important the story is as the method for conveying our message. So important that we sometimes have to sacrifice a bit of factual correctness and completeness to effectively communicate our message.This book gives a nice insider view on what goes wrong when scientists try to communicate their findings to the public. And gives good tips and food for thought on how we should, and can, change this.It's not a definite guide on how to communicate scientific findings, but it does set out a thought process and a frame of reference that should be used when you attempt to communicate science in the modern media. And that makes this a valuable book for anyone who does this or wants to do this.
    • 4/5
      Good: This book tells scientists and science communicators how the modern world of mass communications works. This world of short attention spans and 'style over substance' (as the author puts it) provides serious challenges to scientists who want to communicate the importance of science to a greater audience. Olson tells it how it is, without making apologies. And he is right - we can wish all we want that people would just see that science is fascinating and exciting, but the fact is most of society doesn't have the background or attention span to appreciate science (there is of course a subset of people who do, but let's be honest, we are talking about maybe 5-10% of the population at best).On the other hand, Olson persuasively argues, we MUST communicate science to a broader audience. It is simply too important for us not to. Issues like energy, pollution, stem cell research, the economy all depend on substantial inputs from sound science. But how to make people listen?Not so good: The book raises important issue and is a call to action. But what action? This is where the book falls a bit flat. A large part of the book is filled with anecdotes how bad scientists are in communicating, how they are unlikeable smart-asses. Only towards the end of the book Olson admits that this only applies to about 30% of all scientist, which leaves 70% which are likable and at least serviceable communicators. It is these people we need to encourage and help to improve their communication skills. But the book is short on practical advice on such issues how to approach community groups, how to give better talks to the public, writing popular science books etc. This is somewhat understandable, since Olson is filmmaker (and he suggests we all make films), but it makes the book a bit less useful than it could have been.The other criticism is that through his pages-long rantings against unlikeable scientists, he comes across quite unlikeable himself. A lot is written in the first person, and after a while it sounds like: All hese unwashed, stodgy scientists are clueless and only "I" know about how to communicate science. Which tells me that Olson has maybe spend too much time in Hollywood and buys into the Hollywood stereotypes - I certainly don't see the majority of my fellow scientists the way he does.Having said that, I still feel this should be required reading for all scientists who want to reach a broader audience. It certainly gave me a lot to think about...
    • 4/5
      Olson's thesis is that Scientist do not communicate their ideas or methods with the public effectively, and that this needs to change, in order influence public thinking and opinions on all things scientific. To be totally honest most practicing scientist I know are horrible communicators. I'm just not totally sold on his methodology. Olson is both passionate about this subject matter and faithfully practices what he preaches. I even think most of his ideas and theories about communication are spot on (this is coming from someone who has no idea how to communicate). I just don't see how poor communicators are going to incorporate these principles into their lives and future work. I guess that's what is disappoints me the most about the book. There is no clear guide on improving our communication with the public at large. Otherwise a very good read that I think should be incorporated into every science curriculum coupled with a seminar or workshop would help everyone from research scientist to working stiffs having to deal with clients that may not be as well informed on the subject matter.