Basic Steps to Making a Science Video with a Smartphone

One of the biggest barriers for scientists to use video as a communication tool is the perception that video making is time consuming, expensive, and technically challenging. I know that this idea is out there not only because of comments from colleagues, but because this was my impression before I got involved in making videos. What I eventually learned was that advances in communication technology have made it possible for anyone to make a video—with inexpensive equipment and a minimum of time and effort. We now have (1) devices and software that make it ridiculously easy to create an effective and powerful video message and (2) the Internet where we can instantly share our knowledge globally.

To address this particular barrier, I’ve created a new tutorial that is designed to show the science professional just how easy it is now to create a video to share science. My goal with this brief tutorial was to demystify the video-making process for colleagues and students unfamiliar with it and to show how easy it is to plan, film, and edit a video with a smartphone (iPhone). I’ve emphasized the use of smartphones in this particular tutorial because: (1) most people already have one and know how to use it, (2) they have excellent cameras that can produce high definition video, (3) there are excellent movie-editing apps for mobile devices, (4) both the camera and editing software can be readily mastered with minimal training and effort, (5) their Internet accessibility facilitates sharing the video with others, and (6) filming, editing, and sharing a video is accomplished with a single device. Although other types of recording devices and more sophisticated editing software are available, they require somewhat more time and effort to master.

Here’s that tutorial (click here for a direct link):

Bow Shock

Photo by Christian Nielsen at

The film opens with a time-lapse of an astronomical observatory framed against a backdrop of stars rotating slowly overhead in the night sky. We hear foreboding music that suggests the inevitable passage of time. Then we see astronomers at work inside the observatory gathering data from various sensors and arrays aimed at nearby asteroids, distant stars, and far-away galaxies. Throughout the night, the scientists and staff deal with routine problems such as a faulty temperature sensor. Meanwhile, the telescope camera is methodically snapping images of celestial objects.

 The next morning, a young researcher notices an unusual visual pattern in the night’s data—a curved distortion in space that resembles a bow wave generated by a ship moving through the ocean. Such interstellar phenomena are called bow shocks. But this one seems to be different. She takes her discovery to the director of the astronomical institute, who is taping a public service video about their new telescope and state-of-the-art camera, which captures the telescope’s entire field of view and creates a tridimensional cartographic image of the sky. After she finishes recording the voice-over for the video, the director tells the young scientist to put her images from last night’s work on screen. They watch as the computer stitches the images into a time-lapse view of the bow wave moving diagonally across the starscape. The young researcher estimates that it is traveling at about one third the speed of light. More calculations reveal that the bow wave is passing through the Oort Cloud in the outer reaches of our solar system. Whatever it is, it’s right on our doorstep.

Then, the director points out something really astonishing…the bow wave appears to be slowing down.

Although the scenes depicted above are fiction, they were filmed at a very real observatory, newly built for the purpose of wide-field optical surveys of the universe—the Observatorio de Astrofísico de Javalambre located at Sierra de Javalambre in Teruel, Spain. The film, entitled “Bow Shock” is a collaboration between filmmaker Javier Diez and scientists from the Javalambre Physics of the Accelerating Universe Astrophysical Survey (J-PAS). It was screened at the 2016 Imagine Science film festival and later archived at Labocine—a platform for new-wave science films. Watch it here: Bow Shock.

We are all familiar with science fiction films, which often take us to the edges of human imagination: The Day the Earth Stood Still, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Blade Runner. Alien. But Bow Shock belongs to a new genre called “scientific fiction”, which is a cross-fertilization of science fact and cinema. Emphasis is on getting the technical details right (something Hollywood often fails at) while telling a compelling story (something Hollywood excels at). In this particular film, the observatory and its research goals are real, but the story being told (about the bow wave discovery) is fictional. The idea is to provide an accurate account of the science while telling an intriguing story of how scientists of the future might use this new observatory to spot evidence of extraterrestrial life or other celestial phenomena. It’s an interesting approach that, in my opinion, has a lot of promise.

Bow Shock is a good example of scientific fiction—in this instance with actors playing the parts of scientists and observatory staff. The film is technically sound, well made with eye-popping visuals of astronomical techniques, and tells an intriguing story. Information about the observatory’s unique telescope and camera system is cleverly conveyed in the fictional story by having one of the characters record a public service video summarizing key features of the system. This approach is much more palatable than having a scientist give a dry, awkward speech on camera to introduce the observatory and its equipment. The fictional story about the bow wave does more than capture and hold the viewer’s attention while the more technical aspects are presented. It illustrates how astronomers look for unusual patterns in data collected with telescopes. By featuring the bow wave phenomenon, the film not only shows how astronomical research is conducted, but also how the observatory might make important discoveries in the future.

Of course, the biggest discovery would be to find signs of extraterrestrial intelligence. The film hints at this possibility, and the scientist actors speculate about how First Contact might occur and what response we might expect. This focus on First Contact takes advantage of people’s fascination with the question of whether life exists outside the Earth. There’s also a bit of historical irony in the film when the Spain-based astronomers recall what happened when Spanish conquistadors encountered the people of the New World. The analogy between early (Spanish) explorers sailing the oceans in search of new trade routes and spacefaring aliens sailing across the galaxy suggests to the viewer some potential outcomes based on known historical encounters. In other words, the film gives the viewer a lot to think about, but without resorting to exaggeration of the science.

Using scientific fiction to convey information about science is an interesting idea. Scientists often struggle to talk about their research in a way that is both understandable and appealing to the average person. Scientific fiction might be helpful in this regard, especially to show how a line of research might lead to breakthroughs in the future. By taking this approach, science filmmakers can spark people’s imagination about what discoveries a line of research may reveal. Humans are hard-wired to get their information in the form of a story. And, making such a film could be a lot of fun. Bow Shock was made by professional filmmakers and actors, but such a film could be made by a group of scientists or science students collaborating with film school faculty and students, for example. The scientists would ensure that the technical details were conveyed accurately, and the filmmakers would provide the cinematic expertise and acting talent. Coming up with a fictional story that is scientifically accurate would be challenging, but could be enlightening for the scientists involved. For more examples of scientific fiction films, check out the Labocine series.

Of course, you don’t have to make up a story to create a compelling film about science or scientists. In my next post, I’ll talk about taking a documentary approach to making films about science that resonate with viewers who otherwise have little interest in science.

Teaching Better Communication Skills in Science Courses

In the wake of the recent U.S. presidential election, scientists are redoubling efforts to communicate the importance of science to society. Part of such an effort must be to train the next generation of scientists to be more effective communicators than my generation was. For some years now, there has been a growing movement to improve communication of science. Courses and programs focused on teaching scientists and science students to be better communicators have been implemented at a few institutions of higher learning (for example, the Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science at Stoney Brook University). Some science societies (AGU is a great example) also are sponsoring keynote talks at conferences on science communication as well as workshops and webinars that teach members about new communication tools and practices.

Progress has been slow, however, and many science students still receive little, if any, training in science communication. At best, undergraduate and graduate students may be given class assignments that provide training in traditional modes of scientific communication—writing a scientific report or giving a conference talk, for example. Although such skills are necessary for someone to succeed in a scientific career, new skills involving modern communication technologies are increasingly required of science professionals. Furthermore, some experts say that scientists wishing to inform the public about the importance of their work must go where the consumers of science information hang out: social media (Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat) and media-sharing platforms (YouTube, Instagram, Vine). To do so will require 21st century communication tools and knowledge of how to use them. Those who acquire such skills early will be at an advantage later in their careers—an ability to communicate with a diverse audience may even make a difference in getting a job. More broadly, a large cohort of trained scientist communicators can help counter anti-science and pseudo-science movements, which threaten the way science and scientists are perceived by policy makers, the media, and the general public.

Of course, not every science professional can or should become a highly visible communicator on the order of Carl Sagan or Neil deGrasse Tyson. That level of participation and visibility is not what I am talking about. Instead, I’m suggesting that we raise the overall communication skill level of students just enough so that when they must interact with policy makers or the general public as scientists, they can do so more effectively and confidently. One way to encourage and train students to communicate science is to make learning communication skills part of science courses. In addition to the typical course material, students may be given assignments that help them become better communicators. They might create a talk for the general public; an infographic about an important scientific issue; or a video about a species, habitat, or process covered in the class material. The idea would be to introduce students to 21st century communication methods as well as to begin their training in how to effectively engage audiences outside the scientific community.

So, how might this work in a science class?

Recently, I was asked by a colleague, Dr. Tracy Quirk, at Louisiana State University to speak to her class about how to make videos to share science. The course is called “Plants in Coastal Environments”, which covers the distribution and ecology of plants growing in coastal wetlands and adjacent habitats. The course is taught in conjunction with a university-wide program, Communication Across the Curriculum, which endeavors to enhance students’ communication skills in four areas (speaking, writing, visual, and technological). The course must focus on two of these four communication skills and create class assignments that address the requirements for those selected modes. For example, to demonstrate visual skill to communicate discipline-specific information, students might create a video or some other sophisticated visual product. In a communication-intensive course, a portion of the final grade must reflect communication-based work.

One of the class assignments for this particular class was to select a plant species studied in the course and make a video about it. There were about twenty students, who worked in pairs to design and produce a video about coastal plants such as Avicenna germinans (black mangrove), Spartina alterniflora (smooth cordgrass), or Taxodium distichum (bald cypress). Early in the semester, I gave an hour lecture in which I covered some basic information about planning, filming, and editing a video—enough to help the students avoid common filmmaking mistakes and to give them a few ideas for designing their video projects. The students then worked on their video assignments through the following weeks, many filming parts of their video during class field trips to the coast of Louisiana or, for graduate students, during field trips to their research sites.

I again visited the class near the end of the semester when the students presented their completed videos. I was really impressed by the results. The videos were interesting and told intriguing stories, for example, about how a species adapts to the wetland habitat or the relationship of the species to a broader environmental issue such as the BP oil spill. Each video was required to include some data from the literature relevant to the species, and all the student videographers were able to weave that information into their stories. Overall, I could see that they had paid attention to the suggestions I made in my lecture. Most avoided the novice mistakes I often see in first-time videos. Every video was rated by each student, which provided peer feedback on which aspects were good and which could have been done better. What stood out to me was how much more appealing a video was when a student appeared on camera and told a more personal story or impression to introduce their topic. This approach was engaging and quickly grabbed the viewer’s attention. The other thing I saw was that the students came away from the experience with a better appreciation of what it takes to be an effective science communicator. And that, folks, is an important insight for someone who plans to be a science professional.

Below are two of the videos created by students in this class (direct links to videos here and here):

In summary, by emphasizing the use of communication tools such as video in science class assignments, educators can help raise the overall communication skill level of students and better prepare them to compete in the 21st century. As I said above, the goal is not to create an army of Carl Sagan clones, but simply to help future scientists be a bit more engaging and informative in their interactions with the lay public. A little bit of training in communication can go a long way toward improving the overall level of performance when a scientist is called upon to be interviewed by the news media, to testify before Congress, or to give a public lecture about science.

If you are a science educator and are interested in learning more about how to teach better communication skills or if you are a student wanting to acquire those skills, there are many tools and resources available (for example, see the AAAS site or the Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science).

Use Animation to Tell a Story about Science

Telling stories about science can be fun and rewarding, but not always easy to accomplish with video. Animation software can help us tell our stories in a way that is appealing both visually and emotionally. Animation can be an especially good option when live action is difficult or impossible to film. You can let your imagination go wild in an animated film. The laws of physics can be suspended. Time can be compressed or expanded. The action can take place on Earth, on a distant planet in the Andromeda galaxy, or in an imaginary world populated by talking tomatoes. The hero can be a human or, just as easily, an animal or a machine. Characters in a story can have ordinary traits or be imbued with magical powers. The possibilities are endless.

Animation can come in handy telling stories about science or scientists. With an animation, a science filmmaker has much greater freedom to present a concept or to share a particular viewpoint. For example, you might want to show how an atoll develops over millennia from an underwater volcano (see video below), but there are some aspects that cannot be filmed easily. Using an animation to illustrate the different stages in atoll development, for example, lets the filmmaker depict geological processes that are too slow to film—and simultaneously makes the entire process easier to visualize. Basic animations like the ones in Birth of an Atoll can be created in PowerPoint.

Don’t want to have a human narrator or protagonist in your science video? With an animated film, a filmmaker can build a story around a non-human character with very human thoughts and feelings—one that appeals to a broad audience. A great example is the Disney-Pixar animated film, WALL-E (see movie trailer below), which features a lonely cleaning robot on a garbage-filled and lifeless Earth who falls in love with EVE, a more advanced robot sent to scan the planet for signs of life. The film quickly draws you in and makes you root for the little robot. Many things happen in the film that are far-fetched, but are readily accepted by the viewer. And the film gets across a message about what might happen to the Earth (and to the human race) if we aren’t careful. Telling the story from the viewpoint of a sentient machine helps the audience see, through other eyes, where rampant consumerism, corporatism, and human reliance on technology might lead. This approach works because the viewer becomes emotionally invested in the story and its characters and is thus more receptive to the underlying message.

Of course, the production of WALL-E required a vast team of scriptwriters, designers, animators, sound specialists, and more. However, you don’t need an army of professional animators to create a short film to illustrate a scientific concept or to tell a story. As I mentioned above, simple animations can be produced in PowerPoint. And for more sophisticated animation, there are a number of animation software packages that are available for both professionals and non-professionals. However, the learning curve for these applications is usually steep. And to create comic-type animations, you need some serious drawing and design skills.

What’s needed is something a bit more user-friendly. A few years ago, I discovered  MotionArtist, a Comic Animation software by SmithMicro and tried the beta version of the software to create a graphic story (Brown Marsh Apocalypse). It’s been upgraded since then, with several improvements and bug fixes. This software basically lets the user create story panels (like the ones in a cartoon), import media and then add motion to individual on-screen objects as well as to sequence everything in a timeline to tell a story. MotionArtist was designed primarily for comic artists to import their illustrations and then to animate the artwork, converting it to digital format for posting online. However, use is not limited to this narrow purpose. The import function also lets the user bring in images, video clips, and audio tracks—and these can be sequenced to tell a story—in much the same way movie editing software works to sequence video clips. Layered Photoshop files can also be imported—as a composite or as individual layers, which can then be individually animated. The screenshot below shows the MotionArtist workspace in “Director view” (click on the image to see full view).


In the timeline (at the bottom of screen), the user creates scenes to build a storyline. Each scene contains one or more panels. A “camera view” lets the user pan across panels or zoom in or out of a panel. The scene pictured above contains three panels, the size and shape of which can be customized with shape-drawing tools. The top-left panel contains an imported video clip. The top-right panel contains a photo and a word balloon. Word balloons are easily created and animated, allowing the user to produce conversations by the characters in the story. The bottom panel contains a background photo and several individual objects (images of plant stems and snails) that were imported separately and that can be separately animated. For example, I can have a sequence in which the snails are moving up or down the plant stems. Each imported object or panel is represented in a track, stacked in the timeline. Stop points (like keyframes) are used to set the timing for each track. I wanted to add some background sound and so imported an audio file of waves lapping on the shore (this audio track is the top-most track in the timeline). The user can play the working files back in real time, which helps in editing. Once the animation is completed, the user can preview the HTML5 file online in a browser window or export as an interactive HTML5 file or as a video file.

To relearn how to use the software and examine the various features that might work with my media, I used MotionArtist to 1) illustrate a biological process and 2) tell a graphic story. I first tried to animate a leaf falling from a tree canopy to the forest floor where it fragments and decays (see video below). I used only four photographs to create this animation. You can see this brief animation below. In a future tutorial, I will show how I used MotionArtist to animate the leaves.

I also wanted to create a longer animation that told a story….one that would require me to use more of the tools and features of MotionArtist. I decided to do a sequel to the Brown Marsh Apocalypse and tell a new story about how climate change may affect coastal ecosystems in the Mississippi River Delta. Warmer temperatures during the past few decades have allowed the spread of tropical trees (called mangroves), which are replacing salt marsh grasses. How will such changes affect the coast? The tale of this environmental change is again told from the viewpoint of a marsh snail who was the hero of the previous video. This story follows Perry on a quest to find out how climate change may change the snails’ home and way of life. As you’ll see in the video below, I was able to tell the story with mostly photographs and text balloons.

In conclusion, I had a lot of fun playing around again with the MotionArtist application. I found this latest version of MotionArtist relatively easy to use, although some tasks took a bit of trial and error to figure out. As the examples I’ve shared here illustrate, animation software can be used effectively to demonstrate a scientific process or to tell a story about science…and it need not require artistic skills that the scientist videographer lacks. All it takes is imagination and the ability to visualize the story you wish to tell or the process you wish to convey.

Scientists Should Share Their Stories: More Important Now Than Ever

On November 9, I woke up to a new world—a world that seemed more uncertain, more dangerous, and more hostile to logic and facts than existed just a few hours before. I’m referring, of course, to the recent U.S. presidential election. What this change in administration means for those of us in science is unclear. But many in the scientific community are worried about their jobs, their research funding, science literacy, the environment, and many other things. It’s taken me several days of reading and thinking about the potential impact of the election on science to get to a point where I can move forward.

In this post, I’d like to offer some thoughts about moving forward and emphasize the role of video as a powerful tool for scientists to communicate about the important work they do. Since I started this blog in 2012, I’ve written about many aspects of video-making and why video is so effective as a communication medium. I feel now, more than ever, that the scientific community need to make their voices heard; and they need to use 21st century communication tools such as video and social media if they want to reach beyond their ivory towers…and be heard.

A Disturbing Trend

For me, perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the campaign rhetoric was the way in which facts were ignored and conspiracy theories were embraced. When science was mentioned, it seemed that opinions based on falsehoods were accepted as facts, and facts (climate change, for example) were dismissed as hoaxes. This, despite all the efforts of government science agencies, science societies, and individual scientists to debunk false claims about climate, vaccines, evolution, and other politicized topics and to communicate the importance of credible science to society.

Just as disturbing is the message these actions send about how the scientific community may be viewed in the future. Scientists have traditionally been viewed by the American public as trustworthy (4 in 10 Americans express a high degree of confidence in the scientific community) and the scientific enterprise as essential to society (9 in 10 Americans agree that science and technology will create more opportunities for future generations) (NSF Science and Engineering Indicators 2016). But when our country’s leaders dismiss credible scientific evidence in favor of quackery, they are signaling that the sources of that evidence (scientists) are not to be trusted and that science is not important to the future of the country.

The Post-Truth Era

The scientific community will face some big challenges in the next few years—not the least of which will be countering anti-science and pseudo-science movements, which will be emboldened by the outcome of the election. We’ve already seen the rise of fake news sites on Facebook, with speculations about how they may have influenced the election. The public engagement with false stories on Facebook skyrocketed during the latter months of the campaign. Fake news reported on sites that made up stories about the candidates (e.g., the Pope endorsed Trump; Clinton sold arms to ISIS) outperformed real news. Such movements are fed by the larger political culture in which debate is won not by the facts, but by appeals to emotion. Factual rebuttals are ignored, while falsehoods are repeated ad nauseam.

This cultural shift has prompted the coining of new words that encapsulate the way “truth” is viewed. For example, the Oxford Dictionary has just announced its word of the year: post-truth, which means “as relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion or personal belief”. As explained on the dictionary’s website, the “post” part of the term doesn’t mean “after an event” such as in post-war, but instead refers to a time when the concept is no longer relevant. In this case, the concept that is no longer relevant is the truth. Stephen Colbert had earlier introduced a word with a similar focus: truthiness (defined as ‘the quality of seeming or being felt to be true, even if not necessarily true’).

These new words illuminate a disturbing phenomenon, on broad display during the campaign—one that scientists (and science communicators) will find difficult to counter. I say difficult because what scientists deal in is the truth, and they are flummoxed when scientific facts are ignored in favor of myths or when the honesty of science practitioners is questioned. How do you counter someone who refuses to acknowledge hard facts or who questions the motivations of scientists?

Don’t Just Inform, Engage

One response to expressions of disbelief in scientific evidence is to double down on the facts and data, as if more scientific evidence will shatter misguided opinions. However, that knee-jerk reaction doesn’t work. This deficit model of science communication has been mostly discredited as ineffective (i.e., giving people more information does not necessarily change their minds). Credible scientific data will influence only those who are receptive to it (and seek it out); however, scientific evidence alone won’t budge those who are emotionally tied to a particular position. If people are unswayed by facts, then scientists and science communicators must pay attention to people’s opinions and attitudes about scientific topics. This idea is not new, of course. Science communicators have been saying for some time that it’s important to do more than just inform; it’s necessary to engage people emotionally and on a personal level. That doesn’t mean abandoning scientific evidence….it means developing messages that resonate with people on an emotional or personal level.

One person who does this well is Dr. Katharine Hayhoe, climate scientist:

We clearly need to continue explaining science to the public, but in a way that captures people’s attention, acknowledges their concerns and personal beliefs, and sustains the public trust in the scientific enterprise. Science agencies, societies, and organizations must continue to serve as clearing houses for objective science information and continue to challenge claims unsupported by scientific data. But what can you, an individual science professional, do?

Tell Your Story

One way you can help is to tell your story about how you conduct science or why you think your work is important to society as a whole. By telling stories, you can help the average person, who has never met a scientist, understand what we do and why we do it. Most scientists are hard-working, dedicated people who are passionate about their work. Their stories are rarely heard by the general public, though, but they would go a long way toward putting a human face on science and making an emotional connection.

There are many ways to tell your story. You can write about your desire to protect our natural resources or to find a cure for a deadly disease and post it on your website, on LinkedIn, or on a social media outlet. Or you can film yourself doing field research in a rainforest or conducting an experiment in your laboratory and explain what motivated you to study that particular subject. These don’t have to be full-blown memoirs or documentaries. A short blog post on Facebook or LinkedIn can convey a lot about you and your scientific passions. An increasing number of scientists and science students are sharing their research with Tweets, sometimes accompanied by a video clip. Such brief messages require little time to craft and post. A video clip attached to a Tweet can show the organism or habitat you are studying or illustrate how and where scientists work.

The point is to convey information about science and scientists without lecturing or challenging people’s personal beliefs. People don’t like to be lectured or to feel they are being talked down to or that their strongly-held beliefs are being questioned. Instead, show that you are excited to share your science with them….that you want them to share in the joy you felt when you discovered a new species, for example, or developed a new test to detect a deadly disease. Find common concerns between you and your potential audience and make the point that you are both seeking the same outcome (food security, better medical treatments, stronger economy, more jobs, cleaner environment). Then you can explain how your science will help make that happen. In telling your story, don’t be afraid to show your enthusiasm, curiosity, determination, or excitement about your research. Even if they question your scientific conclusion, they will appreciate your passion for your work and the integrity with which you conducted it.

Here are a few more ideas for making an emotional connection:

  • Share your joy about doing science.
  • Describe what you like most about being a scientist or your particular science discipline.
  • Talk about a challenge that you faced and how you overcame it.
  • Describe a failure and what you learned from it.
  • Show where you work (laboratory or field) and explain what you like about it.
  • Demonstrate your passion for your scientific topic and why you think it is important.
  • Describe how your curiosity led you to a discovery.
  • Talk about scientific integrity and how you strive to avoid bias.
  • Point out the challenge of finding sufficient funding to conduct your research.
  • Show how your research is helping a local community cope with a health or environmental issue.
  • Have citizens, resource managers, farmers, doctors, or other end users of science information describe the importance of your research to them.

Use Video To Connect With People

I think that one of the best ways to engage people is through the use of video. With video, you can more easily reach people who don’t have the time or patience to read a long essay. You can also more easily show your passion or other motivating force in a video. Yes, you can write about how passionate you are about coral reefs or mangrove forests, but actually seeing and hearing you express your feelings is much more effective and memorable. By showing your human side, you will automatically connect with people. By describing your successes and failures or what drives you to spend 12 hour days in the laboratory, you appeal to people’s fundamental emotions. People will recognize that you are not the arrogant know-it-all that they expected. When you develop a rapport with people, they become more receptive to your science information. And many people are now looking for science information in the form of video; YouTube is touted as the second largest search engine. Why not take advantage of this trend?

According to the NSF report, Science and Engineering Indicators 2016, only 46% of Americans have a good understanding of the process of scientific inquiry (how to conduct an experiment, for example). There are many ways to use video to inform the public about science and the scientific method. Here’s a nice example of a video that shows how tropical ecologists conducted a study of frogs, including the logistical challenges they faced:

The above video provides a glimpse into how scientists formulate a scientific question, design a study to answer the question, and then to conduct the study and analyze the results. This information is provided in a way that is interesting and personable and makes the point that scientists are driven by a strong sense of curiosity and a desire to understand how the world works.

There are many other great examples of videos that explain science, celebrate science, and defend science. Most are freely accessible on media-sharing sites and generally explain science in a way that the average person can understand. As I’ve tried to convey on this blog and website, making a video is no longer something only professional filmmakers can do. Anyone with a smartphone and an inexpensive movie-editing app can create an effective and compelling video. I hope more science professionals take advantage of these and other technologies to share their knowledge with the world.

Moving Beyond 2016

If you’re like me, you’ll be glad when this year comes to an end. It’s been stressful, to say the least, especially the past two weeks since the election. But where do we go from here? Those of us in science know how important the scientific enterprise is to our personal health, our environment, our economy, and our way of life. However, we’ve not done a great job of sharing our science with those outside the scientific community or explaining why science is important to society. This situation is slowly changing, but there remains a lot of resistance. I’m repeatedly told by colleagues that they don’t have time or they don’t see the benefit of communicating beyond the traditional outlets of science journals and conferences. They also express disinterest in using social media. I think it’s becoming clearer to everyone, though, why we should be concerned with informing and engaging the public, the media, and policy-makers.

To avoid feeling helpless in the face of uncertainty, I’ve tried to think of positive ways to move forward. Writing this blog post has helped me process some of the things that bothered me about the campaign and to think about ways to help fellow scientists who are wondering what they can do. I think that by simply telling our stories as scientists, we can begin (or continue) a conversation with the public. By showing our humanity, we send the message that we are not all that different…that we have similar concerns and questions about the world and are seeking ways to make the planet better for everyone. Communicating effectively is not easy, however. If you are considering engaging the public, sharing your experiences as a scientist through social media or on media-sharing platforms is a great way to get started.

More information about and tools for communicating can be found at the AAAS Center for Public Engagement with Science and Technology.