Not-at-All-Scary Friday the 13th Round-Up

It was a scary start to the day with Blogger down, but we're back in business and this Friday the 13th isn't too scary at all. In fact, since you didn't get a post yesterday, today's round-up has a few bonus links and a new summer feature to keep you reading until we're back on Monday.

Making the Case for Investment in Research
For those who wonder why it's important to spend NIH money on global health, here's one great reason: a dramatic decrease in infant mortality. For about $208 per life, 97 families are celebrating a new member of their family. Since that doesn't include the value beyond the control of this study, in the end, it will probably cost even less per life saved. Knowledge is power, lasts a lifetime, and can make more lives possible.

Senator Shelby of Alabama is pushing to save NIH from cuts in FY2012.

Advocacy Around the Web
Research shows that people portray their personalities on social networking sites more honestly than anecdotal evidence has us believe. All the more reason to get out there and tell our science stories and defend research while being ourselves.

We're all excited for summer, but remember that with sunny days come summer sunburns. This well-done PSA - Dear 16 year old me - regarding melanoma should be shared with every teenager you know.

The Vatican has spoken out on climate change and made some strong statements about how we should take action now.

News of the Fun
As you might have guessed, kissing is a mood booster.  

Voting is open until the end of the day today on Doodle for Google, a program to encourage young Americans to put in pictures their life's ambition.You can vote once per age group, and there are many fun doodles to choose from. Also, for a country that's falling behind in math and science, it's interesting just how many of the finalists have science themes.

New Features
As New Voices begins its third summer, we now have enough content to feature historical posts from New Voices. The new segment will appear in round-ups, and if you like it and want it to be an even more regular feature, let us know. Without further ado....

On this day in  New Voices:
2010 - Sarah wrote about Failures in U.S. Chemical Regulation
2009 - FlyGal wrote about U.S. Competitiveness and Innovation

Blogger Issues

If you had some trouble getting to New Voices yesterday, it wasn't just you. Around the world, the host site, Blogger, was out for 20.5 hours. That is basically unheard of, and we appreciate the staff that worked through the night to fix the issues.

What you may notice temporarily is that Christian's sign-off post from Wednesday is missing and some moderated comments are not visible. Blogger is working on restoring all of the work done on Wednesday and we'll be happy to have it back as soon as possible.

New Voices appreciates your patience and understanding and will be getting you back to your regularly scheduled blog posts (as best we can) later today.

Update 4:53 p.m.: It appears that Christian's post is back up now, and aside from the labels, everything else seems back in order. If you have any further issues, please let us know.

Parallel Structures: Internet Memes and Genetic Code

Cross-posted with Research!America

Twenty years after scoring his first hit, British singer Rick Astley became an Internet phenomenon.

Chain letters, whose origins date to nearly a century before the Internet, viral marketing and even Rickrolling all have a curious, scientific parallel: the genetic code.

According to a story in the May issue of Smithsonian magazine, memes (ideas that are spread to others) and the genetic code have several common characteristics: each meme is passed on to a new host; they can rearrange elements of their makeup; and they can evolve over time.

That observation comes from Jacques Monod, PhD, a Nobel laureate in 1965 who died 11 years later – just as the first publications were being written about ARPANET, the Internet’s predecessor. The story’s author, James Gleick, notes that this observation preceded even the DARPA-era Internet, when only a handful of academic centers were connected through a network. Noted evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, DPhil, picked up the theme – it was Dawkins who coined the term “meme.”

The article, which clocks in at nearly 3,950 words according to LongReads.com, is a fascinating look at where memes came from, how they’re classified and what makes them carry on as they do.
A sample, with some themes most familiar to researchers:

Like genes, memes have effects on the wide world beyond themselves. In some cases (the meme for making fire; for wearing clothes; for the resurrection of Jesus) the effects can be powerful indeed. As they broadcast their influence on the world, memes thus influence the conditions affecting their own chances of survival. The meme or memes comprising Morse code had strong positive feedback effects …

Perhaps the analogy with disease was inevitable. Before anyone understood anything of epidemiology, its language was applied to species of information. An emotion can be infectious, a tune catchy, a habit contagious. “From look to look, contagious through the crowd / The panic runs,” wrote the poet James Thomson in 1730. Lust, likewise, according to Milton: “Eve, whose eye darted contagious fire.” But only in the new millennium, in the time of global electronic transmission, has the identification become second nature. Ours is the age of virality: viral education, viral marketing, viral e-mail and video and networking. Researchers studying the Internet itself as a medium—crowdsourcing, collective attention, social networking and resource allocation—employ not only the language but also the mathematical principles of epidemiology.

Indeed, in the communication age, information needs seconds to travel globally. Contrast that with one of Gleick’s examples, Sir Isaac Newton. Despite being one of the most famous men in England in his day, only a few thousand people had any idea what he looked like. Today, people around the world recognize the likeness of President Barack Obama or basketball player LeBron James.

Gleick also cites “jumping the shark” as another example; in the days of digital communication, there are boundless others: Rickrolling, “all your base are belong to us,” Cigar Guy and a Coke geyser – all being continually updated, passed on and giving way to the latest sensation.


Special thanks to today's guest blogger, Brian Hunsicker, a communications specialist at Research!America. Prior to his position at Research!America, Brian was a sportswriter and copy editor at The News & Messenger in Woodbridge, Virginia.

Macintosh Saves the World?

On January 24, 1984, Apple introduced Macintosh. Macintosh would launch a new philosophy toward computing, one that would eventually lead to the ubiquity of computers and proliferation of mobile computing.

The advertisement that launched this new product was nothing short of striking, profound, and groundbreaking. Some consider it to be the most effective television advertisement ever conceived.

The commercial was directed by Ridley Scott, who had recently directed Alien (1979) and clearly adapted thematic elements from the film to the Macintosh commercial.

In the first 10 seconds of the ad, we immediately get a sense of the world that Scott has created. It is bleak, monochromatic, orderly, and authoritarian. At the time, it was thought that this world was an allusion to the current business leader of computing – IBM – a company that was known for its strict standards that even applied to the style of ties that employees could wear. In sharp contrast is the heroine. She is the only female in the commercial and committed to rousing the proletarians.

The ad concludes with a reference to Orwell’s 1984. The implication is that Macintosh will ‘save’ us from the conformity and tyranny offered by Apple’s competitors. Clearly, Apple is making a profound statement and they did it in just 60 seconds.

Has Apple changed the world? What would the technological landscape look like without Macintosh?

Science of Pop Music

On the surface, science and music don't seem to have much in common. However, from solving musical mysteries by studying frequencies to technology programs that break down what makes a song popular, it's evident that there's plenty of crossover. So why do we like the music we do? The race is on between scientists and musical artists to crack the code of great music. Some comedians have also gotten into the act...

**This clip contains some explicit language**

Hat tip to GrrlScientist for her post on the Axis of Awesome last spring.

COWS: Turning Trash into Green

Have you ever wondered what happens to all the food waste produced by restaurants, supermarkets, and cafeterias? It turns out that these businesses spend billions of dollars every year to dispose of the waste in landfills, where it slowly decomposes and releases methane, a potent greenhouse gas. A new company called ReGenerate wants to change this. ReGenerate is developing a technology that can turn food waste into biogas and a rich fertilizer – on site.

In doing so, companies would no longer have to pay for food waste disposal and could use the biogas to generate most of the hot water for their business by connecting it to their existing heating system. The result is a net decrease in greenhouse gas emissions (since the food waste is essentially being recycled) and the creation of valuable commodity (biogas and fertilizer). And by keeping the waste on site, it will no longer take up space in the landfills that have become a point of controversy for communities across the nation.

How does this technology work? It relies on the same principles for digestion as a cow. Yes, a cow. Pulped food waste is fed into an anaerobic chamber (without oxygen) where bacteria break down the waste into natural gas (methane) and fertilizer components. ReGenerate affectionately refers to the technology as the Compact Organic Waste System (COWS). The company estimates that the fertilizer components would be picked up once every 20 days and transported to a nearby composting partner for sale to local businesses.

The idea and team that drive ReGenerate were formed at the University of Michigan. Believe it or not, the founding members were affiliated with the biogas club and formed a collaboration that was cemented between classes and happy hours. So far, the team has won funding from competitions sponsored by the University and state businesses, which were integral in driving the formation of the company and development of the technology.

ReGenerate has developed a business model that takes something with negative value (food waste) as a feedstock and transforms it into a valuable commodity. At the same time, they are reducing greenhouse gas emissions and saving companies money. This is exactly the type of innovative thinking and ingenuity that will be required for the US and the world to address the global environmental challenges that will define our time.

A=B; B=A

Ever wonder how connected science policy and science research is? About as much as Siamese twins attached at the head. Look at some of the current policy issues that affect research (and vice versa).

Climate Change
Serious health and environmental concerns may be triggered by increases in UV radiation and a depleted ozone layer. A climate change bill passed through the House in ‘09 but is facing obstacles in the Senate. The success or failure of current and future climate change legislation will be influenced by scientists and researchers

Stem Cell Regulation
In ’05 and ’07 the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act was passed by Congress but was vetoed by the President. Although President Obama has lifted some barriers to stem cell research, the ‘09 version of the Stem Cell Bill has not passed either branch of Congress.

Genetic Testing
Should consumers have the right to personally administer genetic tests on themselves? In 2008 the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) restricted employers and insurance company from discrimination based on results from genetic tests, but no federal policy regulates how the tests are conducted.

The Environment and Offshore Drilling
Researchers and engineers will play an integral role in determining the Congressional legislative reaction to the BP oil spill. In ‘08, a 27 year offshore drilling ban was lifted, which may now be reinstated.

Cloning
The FDA allows animals to be cloned and their meat sold for human consumption - should scientists be allowed to clone human organs for research or transplant? Should we be allowed to clone extinct or endangered species? Legislation addressing such issues will be framed soon.

Health Records and Internet Privacy
Should restrictions exist when accessing health records electronically? Do search engines have the right to save search data? In ‘10 an online privacy bill was presented in the House, which will effect digital privacy laws and medical record storage. Doctors and researchers will dictate these quality of these regulations.

Tax Credit for Research
The Federal Research and Development tax credit was worth $5.6 billion to U.S. companies in ‘09. The credit includes qualified research, computer time-sharing costs, and a percentage of contract research expenses. It is a temporary program that has been renewed annually for 28 years, but whether it becomes part of the permanent tax code has not been decided.

Competitiveness
The 2010 America COMPETES Act is currently being considered by Congress. It will not only affect NSF funding for the next five years, but legislate energy, STEM education, and technology transfer efforts.

No matter what field you're in or what type of research you do, you should work to affect the policies that affect research.


This is Part 3 of 3 in the Science of Advocacy series.
Part 1 - Senator PhD?
Part 2 - Baby don't cry, baby don't get no milk
Part 3 - A=B; B=A

AAAS Science & Technology Policy Forum - Day 2

Yesterday, we started sharing some of the themes captured by your New Voices bloggers at the AAAS Science & Technology Policy Forum. Today we continue by sharing our notes from two of Friday's sessions.

Also - be sure to check out the New Voices Twitter feed for direct quotes from the speakers.

Strengthening the U.S. Climate for Innovation

• Innovation is using new knowledge to generate payback.
• Innovation has accounted for half of U.S. productivity growth over the pat 50 years (see slide above, courtesy of Andrew Taylor of The Boston Consulting Group).
  
• Increased direct government spending yields results.
• Excellence in science and technology is not enough to be a world leader.
• We need to remove barriers and encourage creativity.
• We need new kinds of scientists and engineers with: communication skills, multicultural understanding, foreign languages, and training in psychology and the creative arts
  
• What can the U.S. do?

Promote science & technology education

Increase innovation spending

Promote industry clusters & centers of excellence

Remove bureaucratic barriers

Promote intellectual property protections

National Security and the Roles for Science and Technology

• Cyber security is uncharted territory; there are no rules of war.
• There is a relationship between higher education and intelligence communities. One mechanism for collaboration is the NSHEAB - National Security Higher Education Advisory Board which works with federal intelligence community.

AAAS Science & Technology Policy Forum - Day 1

Two of your New Voices bloggers were at the AAAS Science & Technology Policy Forum last week to hear the latest policy news on issues in the scientific community. There was a ton of information shared over the two days, so we're breaking it down into three segments for you: day 1, day 2, and the William D. Carey lecture. (A full agenda is available for more details.)

The themes are captured here, and we'll be sharing quotes starting tomorrow morning on our Twitter feed - so follow us @NV4Research for even more coverage of the forum.

Budgetary and Policy Context for R&D in FY2011

• The budget for research is increasing in fiscal year 2011
• The Obama administration cares about science; demonstrated by 30 members of the National Academies of Sciences on his staff.
• Investment at the federal level is more important than ever as state economies suffer from the recession and deal with budget cuts.
• It's hard to change institutions, because due to unions, firing people is difficult.
• Extending the Bush tax cuts would be terrible for the economy
• There is a long, slow gray area between a good and a bad economy, and we are in that gray area right now.

Societal Impacts of Science and Technology

• Greater health directly relates to greater wealth.
• It is hard to analyze the impact of R&D, because there is often not a direct link between the two.

Beyond Cap and Trade: Other Climate Issues

• Geo-engineering poses a number of both scientific and moral questions, not the least of which is, who's hand is on the thermostat if we do have the ability to change the climate?
• Energy and climate change are inherently security issues, because they serve as threat multipliers for instability in the world.
• Who are the experts and which experts do you trust on which issues?
• There is a mismatch between agencies with social science expertise and those with environmental missions, which makes explaining the complexity of climate change an even more difficult task.
• We need more strategies for adapting to climate change, including advanced disease surveillance that accounts for differences in regional climates.
  

Invest in Tomorrow. Invest in Research.

A week or so ago, we invited New Voices to attend Research!America's 2010 National Forum, Invest in Tomorrow. Invest in Research. It was an amazing event - and we'll all be telling you more about it soon. But as a recap, check out Kimberly's live tweeting on NV4Research and the podcasts of the panel sessions below.

From left: R. Tjian, J. Howse, T. Frieden, J. Woodruff, P. Chew, C. Clancy

Panel 1: Working Toward Better Health for All

Moderator: Judy Woodruff, "PBS Newshour"

• Paul Chew, MD, chief science & medical officer, sanofi-aventis U.S.
• Carolyn M. Clancy, MD, director, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
• Thomas R. Frieden, MD, MPH, director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
• Jennifer Howse, PhD, president, March of Dimes Foundation
• Robert Tjian, PhD, president, Howard Hughes Medical Institute.

From left: M. Hamburg, F. Collins, B. Kunz, M. Kinsley, J. Watters,
& M. Anderson

Panel 2: Translating Discoveries into Better Health

Moderator: Michael Kinsley, The Atlantic

• Margaret Anderson, executive director, FasterCures
• Francis S. Collins, MD, PhD, director, National Institutes of Health
• Margaret Hamburg, MD, commissioner, Food and Drug Administration
• Barbara Kunz, president, Health and Life Sciences Global Business, Battelle Memorial Institute
• Jack T. Watters, MD, vice president of external medical affairs, Pfizer Inc.

View more photos from the 2010 National Forum.

Happy Birthday Barbie!

Barbie ^® is a registered trademark of the Mattel Company. All rights reserved.

On March 9, 1959, Barbie Millicent Roberts was born in the fictional town of Willows, Wisconsin to George and Margaret Roberts. Today, she is 51 years old! We all know her as a world-wide icon, but I’m sure these are a few things that you didn’t know about her:

• Barbie's first career was a teenage fashion model.
• Placed head to toe, Barbie and her family members sold since 1959 would circle the earth more than seven times.
• The first Black and Hispanic Barbies were introduced in 1980.
• Barbie has five sisters: Skipper, Tutti, Stacie, Kelly and Krissy.
• Every two seconds, Barbie is sold somewhere in the world.

After graduating from Willows High School, Barbie has worked in the military, medicine, politics, public service, science and transportation. Last year, Barbie’s fans voted for her 126th career move--computer engineering. There is a huge gap in women that pursue engineering as opposed to men. According to the Society of Women Engineers, in 2002, approximately 50,000 engineering degrees were awarded to men, as opposed to 11,000 awarded to women. Women engineers are hoping that having Barbie as an ambassador will inspire more girls to want to become engineers.

Mattel designers worked with real women engineers as well as the National Academy of Engineering to ensure that Barbie’s image was like that of a real engineer. She wears a binary code t-shirt, a smartphone (hopefully a low-radiation Blackberry), Bluetooth headset, laptop bag and a pink laptop.

Barbie has inspired girls for generations to aim high and become whatever they desire. According to Nora Lin, the President of the Society of Women Engineers, “All the girls who imagine their futures through Barbie will learn that engineers — like girls — are free to explore infinite possibilities, limited only by their imagination. As a computer engineer, Barbie will show girls that women can turn their ideas into realities that have a direct and positive impact on people’s everyday lives in this exciting and rewarding career.”

How can we continue to inspire the next generation to pursue careers in the sciences?

Tweet, Tweet

New Voices is on Twitter! Follow us @NV4Research for the latest from the research community. It’s New Voices, in 140 characters or less.

Cell Phones, Radiation and our Health

*Updated post
Do you remember what cell phones were like 10 years ago? My mom’s first cell phone was about the size of a brick and weighed about that much. Today, phones have speaker phone, touch-screens, fast internet browsing and email. The downside to all of this amazing cell phone technology is that many users are being exposed to the highest legal amount of radiation possible.

How much radiation exposure is really safe? In the short-term, studies on cell phone usage have found no increased risk for cancer. However, in cell phone usage studies among people who used a cell phone for longer than 10 years, researchers have found an increased risk of developing cancers on the side of the brain where you hold your cell phone the most.

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) has posted on their website cell phones with the worst and best radiation emissions. If you’re in the market for a smartphone with the lowest radiation possible, check out the Blackberry Storm 9530 (Verizon) or the LG Shine II (AT&T). Users should be cautious of the Blackberry 8820 (AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon) as well as the Palm Pixi (Sprint).

Even if you’re not in the market for a new phone, here are a few easy tips from the EWG's Guide to Safe Cell Phone Usage to reduce your exposure to cell phone radiation:

Use a headset or a speaker. My beloved Blackberry came with a headset in the box. Even though I mainly use the headphones for my iPod, I also plug them into my phone from time to time, when I am too lazy to hold the phone to my ear. Who knew it could actually be good for me?

Choose texting over talking. This is also an easy one. I’m a fan of texting my friends to see how they’re doing or letting someone know when I am running late. With most cell phone carriers offering low-cost unlimited texting plans, you can txt ur way 2 lower radation exposure. :-)

Stay off the phone when your signal is low. When you have a weak signal, your phone emits more radiation to find a tower. Try to only use your phone when its signal is at its best.

According to CNN, the video that we posted yesterday is a hoax. Thankfully, our cell phones cannot double as popcorn kettles. But if you are concerned about the health risks with cell phone usage, speak out and tell the FCC and the FDA to modernize their cell phone radiation standards.

*June 1, 2011 update: This is back in the news again, and everyone seems to be covering it. There's no real new news to be had, but see what's being said via the Knight Science Journalism Tracker.

February News Round-Up

As we quickly approach the end of the shortest month of the year, here's some of the interesting stuff the New Voices bloggers are reading.

Reactions on Biomedical Research Funding
As you recall, earlier this month, the President's budget was released and requested $32.1 billion for NIH. This was an increase over the previous year's budget, but a decrease if you consider the financial bump from American Recovery and Reinvestment Act they have received for the past two fiscal years.

This past weekend the annual meeting for the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences was held in San Diego. One of the distinguished guests was Dr. Francis Collins, the director of the National Institutes of Health. During a press conference, Dr. Collins shared his thoughts on funding outlooks for biomedical research. In response to the 2-year stimulus money, Collins emphasized that major scientific progress can't be supported by short-term funding increases. One of the approaches the NIH is considering to compensate for the lower budget is by investing the funds that they do have into more high-risk projects, hoping it will enable larger breakthroughs to occur. Collins said, "If you’re not supporting research that fails sometimes, then you’re probably not doing a good job of encouraging the most groundbreaking ideas."
By: Sarah

New Hopes on the Fight against HIV/AIDS
During the annual meeting for the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences, Brian Williams, a research fellow at the South African Centre for Epidemiological Modeling and Analysis, said that global public health officials could eliminate HIV/AIDS in 40 years, and stop HIV infections in as soon as five years. Epidemiologists are now looking to use anti-retroviral (ARV) medications to curb the spread of HIV/AIDS. Since ARV treatment can result in a reduction of the HIV virus by twenty-five times, epidemiologists are hoping that if more people with HIV are treated earlier, there would be fewer new cases of the disease. If the program is introduced, it would be expensive – between $3 billion to $4 billion per year. However, Williams states that the plan would show savings immediately, reducing hospitalizations and lost years of life from youth passing away from the virus.
By: Kimberly

Reacting to Advancing Technology
Research inevitably leads to new advances. However, it can be a challenge for people to incorporate technologies or knowledge into their lives - be they computers, vaccines, or safety procedures. Over at Slate, Vaughan Bell gives us a history of "new" technology and how society has responded through the years. You might be surprised to find that even writing was once considered to be "too much" of an advancement for society.
By: Heather

A New Voice at ScienceOnline 2010

Allison sporting her map of the human genome t-shirt (courtesy of AAAS) after returning from ScienceOnline 2010.

For months, I had watched the Facebook event, the #scio10 hashtag on Twitter, and the Wiki. I had my hotel roommate and a Google map of directions to each conference location. But it was a couple days before leaving for ScienceOnline 2010, and I was nervous. I had experienced blogger star-strucked-ness before, and I didn’t want to clam up during such a great opportunity to learn from some of the best science communicators out there.

Fortunately, I had nothing to worry about. ScienceOnline retained the “dinner party” feel you often get on Twitter, where the person sitting next to you, shaking your hand, or leading your session could be a book author, a trained scientist, or someone from one of the many institutions and organizations in the Research Triangle Park area. All forms of participation were welcomed and rewarded, and I left feeling more connected to a community of science bloggers than I had before.

As a communication fellow at Research!America, I look through discussions about science communication through an advocacy lens. During the session “Rebooting Science Journalism in the Age of the Web,” Ed Yong of Not Exactly Rocket Science (I could listen to him talk, er, blog all day) asked whether the publication where science-related content even mattered anymore. “If it’s on the internet, people can find it,” he said.

For me, this raises issues of access: how can we create new advocates for research if the communicators aren’t pushing content to new audiences and instead pull them into a specialized community through blogs and other channels (thanks for BoraZ for this distinction)? I thought this question was answered constructively in David Kroll and Damond Nollan’s session on engaging underrepresented groups in online science media, where the discussion turned to using mobile phones and Facebook at historically black colleges and universities.

Who will be the next voice for research? There was so much potential among the ScienceOnline participants. I thought Anil Dash made a convincing case for Expert Labs, a new initiative supported by the American Association for the Advancement of Science which would serve as a filter for policymakers who seek answers from scientists and other experts, but may not know the right questions to ask.

Additionally, Michael Specter, Friday’s keynote speaker and author of Denialism: How Irrational Thinking Hinders Scientific Progress, Harms the Planet, and Threatens Our Lives, ignited the conference with his impatience for misleading information about science, but reminded us throughout the weekend that he was dedicated to promoting scientific interest through his journalism. “Science is much bigger than special interest stories,” he responded to Ed Yong’s question above.

The diversity of the body of ScienceOnline made for lively sessions and informal conversations, and there are many themes not considered here. Based on the amount of content created during ScienceOnline--video, Twitter, blogs, images and Slideshare--I think you could spend a couple days sifting through it and feel as if you experienced the conference firsthand. All content should be marked with the #scio10 hashtag, so keep that in mind in your searching and posting.

Next up: ScienceOnline 2011!


Allison Bland is a communications fellow at Research!America and a graduate of McGill University with degrees in English and history of science. She has previously contributed to New Voices with posts on science education and how-to effectively use Twitter.

How To: Create an Organizational Facebook Page

By now, you’ve probably heard it over and over again—social media is changing the face of communication. Here at New Voices, we’ve seen social media, including Facebook, change the face of science communication and advocacy. Top science and research advocacy organizations, like the American Cancer Society and American Heart Association, have attracted large numbers of supporters using Facebook, including over 160,000 members for the American Cancer Society!

So how should a non-profit go about using Facebook to increase their reach on the internet? An informal survey of non-profits using Facebook revealed that the best pages are set up as Fan Pages, as opposed to Group Pages. Fan Pages are more interactive, and provide Facebook users with more opportunities than Group Pages. Any authorized representative of a business, non-profit, or organization can set up a Fan Page. We’ll give you a quick crash course. (Tip: before you create a Fan Page, you will need to have a personal Facebook page.)

To create a Facebook Fan Page:

1. Visit http://www.facebook.com/pages/create.php to get started.
2. Determine your Page category. Most New Voices readers’ organizations would probably fall under the Brand, Product, or Organization category. This is where you’ll find sub-categories like ‘non-profit,’ ‘government’ and ‘technology product / service.’
3. Enter the name of your organization in the box and sign the authorization release. (Tip: you must sign the authorization release with the same name you used to create your personal Facebook page.)

Now it’s time to set up your page so it will set you apart from the crowd. For advice, New Voices turned to the Wild Apricot, a blog that provides tools and advice for volunteers, webmasters and administrators of associations and nonprofits. Wild Apricot suggests adding Applications to your Facebook page. Applications allow Facebook users even more opportunities to interact with your organization.

One of the most popular Applications for non-profits is Causes on Facebook, also referred to as ‘Causes.’ Causes allows your organization to recruit more Facebook users, keep them up to date with your organization’s latest information, and raise money for your organization if it is a registered U.S. or Canadian non-profit organization. The American Heart Association has raised over $10,000 for its beneficiaries! To get started with Causes, visit the Causes homepage and click ‘Start a Cause’ under the ‘Find a Cause’ tab.

When you’re on Facebook, don’t forget to visit the Your Congress-Your Health and Research!America fan pages.

See you on Facebook!


This is Part 3 of our Facebook How To Series.
Part 1: Using Facebook as an Advocacy Tool
Part 2: Using Facebook Advertising to Raise Awareness

How to: Use Facebook Advertising to Raise Awareness

Earlier this month, we talked about using Facebook as a advocacy tool. Today we'll be looking at a a different way to use Facebook to raise awareness for your cause...

Most of us who are Facebook users realize the social networking site has become an integral part of our lives. Every now and then, usually during a late-night visit to the site, you may notice an advertisement that seems particularly relevant to you. How does Facebook know I’m working in Washington, DC and probably looking for a deal on dinner?!

Facebook advertising is one of the most targeted forms of advertising on the internet. With 250 million users worldwide, advertising on Facebook is a new way to communicate to new audiences. The social networking site is an ideal way for New Voices to increase visibility, raise awareness of their cause, and drive relevant traffic to their websites—all without breaking the bank. This post provides the low-down on creating awareness for your cause by advertising on Facebook.

Foremost concern—paying for your advertising
Facebook offers two different payment structures. Each payment structure allows advertisers to set a daily maximum budget that cannot be exceeded.

Pay for Clicks (CPC) advertising allows you to specify (through a bidding process) a certain amount that we are willing to pay each time a user actually clicks on your ad. The highest-bidding advertisers are awarded ad space and pay each time the ad is clicked. The bid price will vary depending on the target market. For example, you would need to bid a higher price to advertise to the entire New York City network that you would to advertise to the New York University network because NYC has more users than NYU. Facebook provides bid price statistics (avg. price, max., min., etc.) that are specific to each ad proposal and each targeted network.

Pay for Views (CPM) advertising allows you to specify how much you are willing to pay for 1,000 views (or impressions) of your ad. CPM also utilizes a bidding process to determine who is awarded ad space. According to Facebook, CPM advertising is usually more effective for advertisers who want to raise awareness or exposure of their cause (as opposed to generating hits).

Who do I want to see my ad? Targeting your audience.
Facebook ads can be targeted to a very broad or vary narrow audience using any combination of criteria including:

• Age (Ex: 21-25)
• Network/Location (Ex: New York City; University of Michigan)
• Keywords (Ex: health, research, politics, chemistry, oceans, Collins, Obama)
• Education (Ex: political science major, biology degree in 2002)
• Workplace (Ex: University of Chicago, US House of Representatives, Pfizer)

As you identify your audience using these criteria, Facebook will display the approximate number of users your advertising encompasses.

Facebook ads are customizable and can be changed at any time.

Ads include a title up to 25 characters and up to 135 characters in the body. An image can also be included. All Facebook ad views can be tracked, and you can make changes to the ad at anytime to increase viewership.

Now that you know the basics, all you need to do is make the decision. Who do you want to target?? What do you want to say?? And how much do you want to pay??

Facebook can walk you through the rest.

This is Part 2 in our Facebook as an Advocacy Tool series.

Part 1 - Facebook: More than friends?

Facebook: More than friends?

Image credit: Lone Wolf Librarian

If you’re reading this blog, the chances are more likely than not that you have a Facebook page. In fact, there are more than 200 million active users of Facebook; 100 million of those log on each day. If you are one of those 200 million people, it’s time to start using Facebook to as a platform to speak out to your friends (if you’re similar to the average Facebook user, you will have 120 of them).

Today we launch Part 1 of a three-part series about using Facebook as an advocacy and outreach tool.

Part 1: Using the Status Bar to Share Your Message
Part 2: Using the Causes Application to Raise Awareness (and money!!)
Part 3: Setting Up a Page that Will Set You Apart

Part 1: Using the Status Bar to Share Your Message

If you have a Facebook account, you probably already know how to use the status bar. For those without a Facebook account, the status bar allows you to type in short messages that will appear on your account as well as the home pages of all your friends’ accounts. It is common for Facebook users to type a short summery of their thoughts, activities, etc. in to the status bar.

Your status bar is an excellent place to share your thoughts about important legislation, policy issues or news items with your friends. Facebook’s new status bar allows you to share a links to encourage your friends to visit a website you direct them to. Sharing online action alerts with your friends is an especially effective advocacy opportunity.

Here’s the step-by-step for sharing a link. In this example, we use an action alert from Research!America. This is a great model for you to post action alerts from your own membership organizations.

Step 1: Click the “Attach Link” icon in the Status Bar.
Step 2: Insert the link in the text box that popped up. You can easily copy and paste a link from another browser winder. Click “Attach” to load the link. Text will automatically appear when Facebook reads the website you are linking to.

Step 3: Edit the text that appears. You can click on the blue title and the black text to edit each box. Sometimes Facebook reads the wrong section of the website you are linking to, so make sure the edit the text so it says what you want. You can also use the arrows to scroll through other pictures to appear on your status message.


Here is a finished example done by Mary McGuire Richards, a Parkinson’s disease advocate with the Parkinson’s Action Network. Mary is asking all her friends to contact their senators in support of a bill. Mary is also able to share this message directly with her friends by clicking the “Share” link.

Once the “Share” box appears, click the “Send a Message” tab. Here, you can type your friends’ names in the message box and send them a personal message with you link. To save time, you can send the same message to multiple friends by typing each name in before sending. However, the “Share” function is so easy to use that I usually send individual message to each of my friends that may act on my link. I use the same message text, but add their name into the message to make it seem more personal.


While you're using your Facebook status bar to advocate, don't forget to join the Your Congress-Your Health fan page for updates and links to share.

Stay tuned for the next part in the Facebook as an Advocacy Tool Series!

Top 5 Science Movies

As we discussed last Tuesday, there are good science movies and bad science movies. You’ll have to wait a bit to hear me wail about the bad ones, but here are some of the better examples of science in film.

Gattaca: I’ll admit I’m biased because I enjoy this movie, but it’s still fairly scientifically sound. Presenting a future in which parents can control the genetics of their children is neither absurd nor far fetched. The science of screening for genetic defects is already present and it’s not that much of a technological leap to assume that the technology to not only screen but prevent genetic disorders will someday happen and it’s sadly even less of a leap to assume that it will be abused to craft children’s genetic destiny. If you were going to be a parent and you could make your child a star, would you have the will to say no? In the end, this movie presents interesting a realistic ethical question regarding scientific advances we could see in our lifetime. You can’t ask for more than that.

The Right Stuff. This is not the most scientifically rigorous movie, but it really isn’t trying to be. That said, it does an excellent job of depicting the historical, events and discoveries related to the Mercury 7. It’s always so rare to see a movie that says “based on a true story” actually trust that story to be interesting on it’s own..

Blade Runner. Another example of doing a good job with a reasonably imaginative future. No outlandish technological leaps. No one fires a laser pistol. Okay, so there are flying cars, but there will be flying cars any day now (don’t destroy my dream and while we’re at it there will also be jet packs any day). The other reason Blade Runner goes on this list is that it represents an excellent example of quasi super humans (the replicants) who obey the laws of physics. There are innumerable reasons that you can’t rip a steel door apart and to this film’s credit, the superior biological organisms never do.

Contact. Bear with me, I am aware of how ridiculous the giant black gyroscope is. That’s not why the movie is listed. It’s listed because this movie does a respectable job of presenting not only its science, but also the complexity of a discovery like this. You have to get and keep funding which is not an easy task. You have to work in teams, there is rarely if ever a lone scientist making every discovery themselves. Any international project will be complicated and political. But, most importantly, you have to believe in your work. Even in the face of doubters and funding cuts, you have to have absolute unwavering belief in your project, otherwise you are doomed to failure. Also, bonus points for the fact that aliens totally exist.

Awakenings. An all around excellent film that details some very real aspects of a clinical trial and in particular the applicability of drugs to multiple conditions (A Parkinson’s drug is used to “awaken” some patients) and the nature of success and failure. This is an incredibly powerful film about the possibilities of discovery. Plus it makes you cry. It makes everyone cry.

Looking at these movies you can see the common themes. Realistic science, an examination of the philosophical implications of that science and the existence of physics are present in all these films. The science in a good film isn’t always real, but it usually makes a certain kind of sense. Unlike the terrible, terrible films to be discussed next Tuesday.

A Knowledge-based Economy

Comic credit: Scott Adams

I hope everyone had a happy Mother's day yesterday. Like Dilbert's mom, the first time I tried explaining what I did to my mom, she was more concerned about how I'd be making any money as a scientist than with understanding my research. Now that I am a policy fellow, the value of my work may be even more difficult to measure.

For the past few months I have been working on issues of building human capital for the knowledge based economy. That is quite a mouthful, so let me break it down:

• Human capital is the basically assets in the form of well-qualified, trained people in other words - labor;

• A knowledge-based economy is exactly that, an economy based on knowledge and the products of knowledge.

So, I've been working on how to increase our workforce (a.k.a people) for a knowledge-based economy (a.k.a the world we live in now).

This is an issue that has fascinated me for some time now, so I was ecstatic when the good folks at Research!America said that I could work on it.

Why is this issue important? For me (and many of you), it is important because I am a scientist, and this issue directly impacts my workforce.

It is also important in the larger context of our economy. Pretty much everyone now realizes that the days of a manufacturing-based economy are over. We are moving towards a knowledge-based economy . We are moving from jobs that largely require manual skills (like assembly line jobs) to jobs that require intellectual skills (like doing research). Our economy is now trading in goods that are more the product of the mind than the hand (eg. trading in fuel-cell technology has more value than selling a car).

We are also a mature economy and the jobs that promise to stay in America are not the manufacturing jobs but rather the intellectual jobs. The rise of inexpensive and reliable telecommunications and transport has led to the export of jobs requiring intensive input of manual labor and a demand for jobs requiring input of intellectual skills. In other words, a company that trades its products globally is minimizing its manufacturing costs by shipping those jobs overseas, while keeping its R&D facilities - and thus those jobs - here in the US.

So, if we are moving to an economy where intellectual skills and research are going to be valuable, don't we need a trained workforce? Do we need more people who can do research? If so, how will we train these individuals? How much will we need to invest and how long will it take?

I'll be exploring these and other questions over the next few weeks throughout a series of posts on building human capital in a knowledge-based economy. Stay tuned!


This is Part 1 of 6 in our Human Capital and Knowledge-based Economy series.
Part 1 - A Knowledge-based Economy
Part 2 - U.S Competitiveness and Innovation
Part 3 - The Making of a Scientist
Part 4 - From Training to Practice: Joining the Faculty
Part 5 - A Race to Save the Lab Rats
Part 6 - Advocating for Human Capital