Help to make sense of the Daily Mail’s ongoing effort to classify every inanimate object into those that cause cancer and those that prevent it.

PanScience( 或稱 PanSci 或 PS )科學網由台灣數位文化協會(ADCT)成立，邀請台灣科學研究者、教育者、愛好者、以及所有受科學影響的人們，共同暢談科學、將高深龐雜的科學發展重新放置回台灣公共論壇中，並且用理性思考社會議題中的科學面向。<br />
<br />
PanSci整理、歸納、聚焦、傳播台灣以及世界上的科學進展與科學議題，藉此張揚科學的思維，內鍊科學的素養，更要讓科學趣味橫生。

Those who make huge claims—about cell phones, diets, or the internet—bear the burden of proof. A delicate but rigorous piece of writing by Virginia Heffeman.

After they wrote, they tweeted and facebooked and flogged their blogs, and because they were good, and worked hard, within a year or two, magazines asked them to affiliate (on financial terms that were insulting), but they did that, and their blogs got an audience, and then they got magazine assignments, then agents, then book deals, and now, three, four years after they began, these folks, five or six of them, are beginning to break through. They are becoming not just science writers with jobs, they are becoming THE science writers, the ones people read, and look to… they’re going places. And they’re doing it on their own terms! In their own voice, they’re free to be themselves AND they’re paid for it!

Thread about good science writers, focused on S. J. Gould.

From aldaily: In science, confusion is essential to progress. An unwillingness to feel lost, in fact, can stop creativity dead. Now if you’re a science reporter, try telling that to your editor...

NYTimes science editor answers questions about science and the media's reporting of it.

Physics blog (that maybe I should look into) talks about science and the media.

The Santa Cruz graduate program in Scientific Journalism. High praise for it from J. Gorman.