Famous Scientists Wanted
For the past few years I’ve been talking with friends about the fact that scientists should be treated like rockstars or sports heroes. Scientists do amazing work that affects every aspect of peoples’ lives. Why aren’t they compensated for the valuable contributions they make to society? Why isn’t science sold to the public? Where are the PR agents for science? Science needs PR, so that more kids will see science as a future career instead of looking up to the likes of the Jonas Brothers and Hannah Montana.
Why don’t kids look up to scientists? There really are no famous scientists to look up to.
When I say famous, I mean easily identifiable to the general public; famous as in rockstar famous or even reality TV famous… the kind of famous where Joe Shmoe at the grocery store is interested in looking at pictures of you drinking a coffee in the most recent edition of Famous People (Because We Say They Are Famous and We Are The Media) Weekly.
There are scientists who are known for helping to popularize science, like Carl Sagan and Michio Kaku, or for being insulting to large groups of people, like Richard Dawkins and James Watson. But, if you were to ask a cross-section of people at at cocktail party to name their favorite scientist, the majority of them will probably name someone dead. Ask them to name their favorite actor, athlete, or musician and it is a completely different story.
However, within the past few months the grapevine has been abuzz with chatter addressing this issue of scientist popularity. Intel used the idea as the basis for a recent ad.
And, a group out of Southern California are even putting scientists and rockstars together (is this the transitive property of fame by association?).
Both of the above campaigns lack one major component… women. It’s true, women do science, too. And, they should get the recognition they deserve just like the men.
That said, it’s great to hear people talking about science’s public image. The concept of scientist as rock star is growing in the public consciousness. There needs to be a continued and consistent PR effort to maintain that growth. Scientists as a lot aren’t so great at self-promotion, but with help from the marketing and PR community scientists and science could be… the next big thing.
Filed under Esoterica | Comments (13)13 Responses to “Famous Scientists Wanted”
Leave a Reply
Oh my golly gosh, if I haven’t been saying the exact same thing as your opening paragraph for years. I bring this up with anyone who will listen when I see tripe like American Idol and the most pointless contributors in society being treated and viewed as amazing people we should try and emulate.
What interests me, is the reason why. Why do we look up to people who can throw a ball into a net better than the next person. Even more bizarre, why do we look up to singers who may or may not be able to sing very well, but “put on a good show” thanks to a big team working behind the scenes. Ok so it’s mostly PR, I realize that. But even taking into account that “the masses” will just consume whatever they are told to consume, there is still a significant volume of people who can appreciate and look up to the great scientists working today, and yet we just don’t see that happening.
I think a clue to the answer to this lies in the way information is presented and consumed. Scientists aren’t shiny, they don’t catch your eye on TV, they don’t release easily digestible chunks of audio/video.I know Dr Kiki is fighting that very problem, releasing easily digesting chunks of video that don’t need much of a framework to actually understand what is being presented but me personally, while I love the videos, I’m always left wanting more, wanting that few minutes to stretch to 30 minutes or more. Still, I digress,
Mostly, following scientists today requires you spend time understanding what it is that is so great about what they are doing at any given moment. You need the back story in science and a set of rules that help you understand what it is you’re looking at. You do get the odd headline “new thing discovered by scientists” “problem X solved” and it usually gets no more than the time it takes to read the headline in the news, no matter how important it is.
“New pill that will cure all cancers, we have Dr Specimen on the line to tell us all about it”, dodgy black and white picture appears top left of screen because no one in the newsroom could find anything better “The pill will go on sale in the morning and save millions of lives”, says Dr Specimen only to be interupted “I’m going to have to stop you there, we are crossing over now live to the home of Britney Spears who has reportedly dyed herself purple, remarkable news. Over to you Dan”
So, depressingly, I’d have to suggest that the shift to following science rather than pop culture will only happen, when we are able to make the shift from sound bites, to in depth coverage. But with the recent explosion in micro-blogging through services like twitter, it just seems to me that people want or need to reduce everything into smaller and smaller chunks and just consume lots of that.
Of course an easy solution to all this is just to clone Dr. Kiki. A few thousand clones should do, if that doesn’t get people interested in science, nothing will.
🙂
Rock-star scientists or engineers? Once you go beyond Stephen Hawking in physics, there’s Lisa Randall as an obvious candidate. Genetics? Craig Venter. Robotics? Dean Kamen (already famous) or Robin Murphy (should be).
I don’t know about this. While we don’t currently have an eminence of the stature of Carl Sagan, there are people such as Neil De’Grasse Tyson, who frequently appears on the shows that matter most (Stewart/Colbert).
There’s also Paul Sereno at Univ. Chicago, who I think has done quite a good job of marketing his research and himself.
I agree with the commenter above: we need to apply to the NSF for a grant to clone Dr. Kiki. 🙂
Rock Stars are famous because they generate easy money. As part of generating easy money the media creates the image of a Rock Star and markets the hell out of it. Just look at Hannah Montana. If you want to get rich and famous as a scientist you are going to have to create a freak show full of bizarre science phenomena. If you could entertain an audience of 3000 for 90 minutes with science tricks and charged them 20 bucks a head that would generate $60,000 in revenue minus expenses. Do you see where I am going with this?
Just look at all the classic experiments scientists have performed I am sure you can fill 90 minutes easily. Just have a mad scientist brain storming party and see what you can up with!
PS: While were cloaning Dr. Kiki can we also cloan Jeri Ryan? Oh wait cloning is unethical! http://www.ncbcenter.org/FrTad_MSOOB_28.asp
Here in canada, I’d say David Suzuki is the most “famous” scientist, as he has a tv show “The Naute of Things”.
Famous female scientists? Jane Goodall, Rosalind Franklin and Rachel Zimmerman come to mind, but they’re definately not household names.
My perspective is that we’re overly enamored with rock stars and other celebrities to start with. This takes attention *away* from other, more interesting people. In any case, yes, the media makes irresponsible choices, and the masses buy it.
Thanks to the internet I don’t have to rely on the media/masses filter any more. And thanks to people like you!
I think there is something even more insidious. There is definitely a strong anti-intellectualism force in general in our society and this filters in the popular media. Think of how intelligent characters are portrayed in popular culture. Usually a mix of some or all of these ingredients: socially inept, goofy, living in an ivory tower, arrogant, out to bamboozle the average Joe… Even when the character is made likable, it is not someone the average kid would want to emulate… I think science and math are worst hit by this stereotype, but serious writers, artists, philosopers, etc. all get hit by it….
Random thoughts…
Kirsten, I nominate you!!! I think you do a great job helping educate the public. We need to get you on PBS or something!
Maybe the whole way we do education in the USA is making science unpopular, Everyone I know with a Phd (or a Bachelor’s for that matter) is sooooo bogged down in student loans and debt, that the smartest people end up being the poorest. Until there is better access to higher education I think it’s going to be an uphill battle. One of my professors finally paid off his student loans when he was 45! What kid is going to want to emulate that?
That said, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, also does a fantastic job popularizing science. He’s very articulate and very funny.
Brian Cox comes to mind, I mean he looks like a rockstar, and he actually was a rockstar for a while. He could be a great candidate for a science popularizer.
There must be many women scientists, something like half of all PhDs in Math and science are women. But to find someone that is brainy and has some kind of star power might be tough.
What we would need is someone like Hedy Lamarr, someone as brilliant as they are beautiful.
Worth noting, the MythBusters in general and Kari Byron for women, have quickly become stars and icons in their own right. So we’re definitely seeing signs of potential both generally and for women.
In the meantime I’ll join in nominating Dr. Kiki. If The Skeptologists doesn’t take off (FSM forbid), she really deserves at least an hour show of her own. A scientist version of “Dirty Jobs” perhaps?
Kirsten, I whole heartedly agree with you!! Scientists need to be famous!!!! I think part of the problem is that it takes so long for a research project or whatever is being worked on to be proven. But, if there was a way to design a TV show similar to american idol, or so you think you can dance, or project runway, and the prize would be money and the ability to work on an amazing project or something like that, then we could get kids exposed to all the amazing things that scientists do and start getting them thinking about different possibilities. You have such a wonderful personality and inquisitiveness that I think you would be a wonderful host – not to mention you are gorgeous, so rock on woman! You are totally my science rock star right now 😉 I couldn’t say that I was interested in bird brains until I started listening to TWIS.
On the note of women in science. I heard the TWIS podcast where you talked about the study that improving general self confidence in females would be the leading factor in women becoming more interested in science and math, and I completely agree with that. I have an EE degree from UC Davis (go aggies!) and I would count how many females were in my classes. It turns out that it was a 90/10 split of males and females. There were only 2 caucasian females in my entire graduating class. When I look back at my friends in school, I think self confidence was definitely a strong factor in interest in math and science. I had a feeling that I could do anything that I put my mind too (and I still do), and most of my female friends didn’t share that. They felt that they needed help, which ultimately limited their creation of their own success in math and science areas.
One other interesting note, was that it didn’t bother me that I was one of few females in my class until I took intro to genetics as an elective. It was 10/90 male/female. The first day of the class the instructor was waving his hands around and saying, “don’t worry, there won’t be any fractions or anything like that”. I was very offended! But I think most of the class was relieved… so yes, women, you can do math if only you believe in yourself! Don’t buy into the social stereotypes anymore!!
This would help science in the public, but what would it do to science itself when the focus shifts from “doing science” to “competing for fame?”
See also: Pons and Fleischman
That said, I think if you want the public treating scientists as celebrities, we’re going to need some “thems” for our “us” scientists to compete against. An “OUR scientist(s) is(are) defending our tribe from THEM. GO, OUR SCIENTIST(s)!”
See also: NASA vs. the Soviet Space Program in the race to the moon.
Am I really the first person to have to say Carolyn Porco, the leader of the imaging team of the Cassini mission?
http://www.ted.com/speakers/carolyn_porco.html
http://thesciencenetwork.org/programs/beyond-belief-science-religion-reason-and-survival
(session 3, skip the Joan Roughgarden part)
are u a famous sciecetist