Is There Really Science in the Twitterverse?

Hello BenchFly readers! It’s been quite awhile since my last edition, and I apologize for my absence. The life of a scientist… you know? But enough of that- down to my latest instalment. I was all set to give you an instructive, fun article on signal transduction, but events over the past few weeks have inspired me to deviate from the standard Enzyme Corner recipe to bring you something different. Without further ado, through the magic of social media I am here to talk to you about… the magic of social media… or is it the myth? In particular, I’m curious about the place of science within the Twitterverse.

“A bird can roost but on one branch, a mouse can drink not more than its fill from a river.” – Chinese proverb

I can’t quite remember when I first started using Twitter. In the beginning, it was a big deal; I completely bought into the social media hype. But I also found there were substantial benefits to it. If nothing else, I got introduced to BenchFly through Twitter, and hey we can all relate to that! Truly though, I felt as though Twitter was fast becoming a viable tool that could be used to exchange or present information to a widespread audience- assuming it has not become that tool already. For my part, I’ve tried to contribute to science via Twitter; I always tweet whenever I have a new manuscript accepted (particularly once it’s in electronic or paper print). I tweet when I have a new blog post out. I tweet when I’ve discovered or noticed something interesting about science that I don’t usually see in my everyday routine. I enjoy using Twitter as a means of disseminating information- provided I don’t give away research secrets or divulge something that’s about to go into a publication.

In addition to putting a lot out into Twitter, every so often I try to see if I can maybe get something back. As far as I can tell, there are quite a few scientific experts out there. Certainly, there are the people who run BenchFly and everyone who follows BenchFly! In all seriousness, regardless of whether they follow BenchFly, there are professors, grad students, postdocs, research associates, and lab managers. There are technical and sales reps for companies that manufacture and/or distribute equipment and consumables used for scientific research. There are science writers and science media consultants. Effectively, there is a substantial concentration of science intellect out there in the Twitterverse- in theory a lot of hefty brains to pick.

.

“A bird doesn’t sing because it has an answer, it sings because it has a song.” – Maya Angelou

Like many researchers out there, my research requires me to do things that I have not, as of yet, gained extensive familiarity or expertise with. Or, to put it bluntly, sometimes I’ll run an experiment, or use a piece of equipment or biochemical reagent, and I don’t have the faintest idea of what I’m doing. And so, here in 2012 in the internet age, I can take a little walk from the lab bench to my desk, log onto my Twitter account, and throw out a question or two to the Twitterverse. For instance:

(Yes, I know I typed “tryptONE soy broth” instead of “tryptIC soy broth.” What can I say- the exhaustion of a scientific researcher.)

For those of you who are about to complain that my questions are too microbiology-specific, hold the phone for just one second- here’s something a bit less microbiological:

Are people even reading these tweets? Do I have a substantial presence on Twitter? I’m not sure how to answer that. I can throw out a few numbers, for the curious folk. At the moment of writing this, I have 233 followers. I can confidently say that at least 160 of them have some attachment to science or scientific research. I have also been added to 35 lists on Twitter (do people still use those or have they fallen out of common usage?), 26 of which follow scientists. On top of that, I know for a fact that at least one of the questions above was retweeted by at least 2 people; everyone who follows those retweeters, in turn, should have also seen my tweet. Overall, who knows how many people read my question.

I bet you’re all wondering, what sorts of answers did I get for the questions I tweeted above? How many people inundated me with answers, echoing out across the Twitterverse? Well, I’ll tell you:

Zero.

That’s right, zero. Not a single reply to any of those three questions above (along with many other questions I’ve tweeted in my history on Twitter). Some questions or comments have received replies, over my history on Twitter. Many others, however, have not.

.

“Hold fast to dreams for if dreams die, life is a broken winged bird that cannot fly.” – Langston Hughes

So, what went wrong? What happened to my unshakable faith in Twitter as a viable tool for communications, the exchange of ideas and information? Was it misplaced?

Were my questions too specific for one area (well, no, because from above you can see how it ranges from microbiology to general chemistry)? Was it that, simply, no one had an answer? Was no one paying attention?

.

“I would rather learn from one bird how to sing than to teach 10,000 stars how not to dance.” – E. E. Cummings

Some of you might find this shocking: yes, I do have a life outside of science. Back on Sunday night, for instance, I was watching the season 2 finale of The Walking Dead. With the revelation of Michonne and her katana, and that final camera pan away from the campsite and the view of that prison in the distance, Twitter was on fire with tweets about The Walking Dead! Trending topics on Twitter, during that hour, included “Michonne” and “Lori.” I suppose it was too much of a science nerd fantasy to hope, in parallel, that the comparison of trypticase and tryptic soy broth could spark a similar reaction across social media…?

Perhaps it’s just a case that the science following on Twitter can’t quite compare to that of zombies who eat the living. It raises a question though: if we can’t discuss science- and I’m talking about the nitty gritty minutia of science, down to trypticase and EDTA- on Twitter, then where? The discussion groups on LinkedIn? Facebook? More traditional discussion forums on biology-type websites? But then, even if these types of questions are answered in those old school- oops, I mean traditional- discussion forums, you still need to look for the right website, the right discussion “thread” or category among all the discussion forums, post your question, and hope for an answer (and keep an eye on it, if there’s no automated email alert set up for replies). Why is it that we’re not yet at a point where you can simply log on to Twitter, throw a question out into the Twitterverse and get an answer (or answers)?

Now to you, dear readers: what is your experience, if any, with science and Twitter?

.

[poll id=”102″]

.

.

Chris is originally from Montreal, and is a Comparative Biochemist and Physiologist. His educational and postdoctoral experiences have taken him from Montreal to Ottawa ON, State College PA, and finally back to Montreal’s biotech industry. In his spare time- as you would expect from a Canadian- Chris enjoys watching hockey and is a stalwart fan of the Montreal Canadiens and Ottawa Senators. You can keep up to date with the latest from Chris on Twitter.

.

Do you think Twitter is a useful or overrated tool for scientists?

.

.