Propaganda Much?

[jebbypal]

So had to share this as I find it highly amusing. In this week's Science Magazine "on the Record" section there was this blurb:
Science at the movies
The silver screen is the latest weapon in the Pentagon's bid to bolster national defence. It is training scientists to write screenplays in the hope that films featuring glamorous researchers will draw more US students into science

LMAO. First, the odds of them netting a scientist that can write a good screenplay? Pretty slim. Second, that one of those that is "good" is willing to blatantly lie and portray research as being glamorous? Okay...well, scientists lying isn't unheard of...but well, really. Eccentric, odd, boring, those things I could easily and honestly portray scientists as being. But the simple fact that so few actually work well with others makes it difficult to portray it as glamorous. I think even the physicists at Los Alamos back in the hey day would have admitted that it would be hard to portray the actual nitty gritty as glamorous.

CSI tries it's best to make the actual business part of science interesting. But even to tell a story they have to have the forensics guys take part in the questioning. Lab work just doesn't lend itself to story telling unless something goes horrendously wrong.

Then this caught my eye when I started explorer: Stampede for Cheap Laptops

Comments

[cretkid.livejournal.com]

heeeeeeeeeeeeeee

I tell good anecdotes, but to write a screenplay about what I do for a living? it may be full of snarky-out-of-context remarks that would make no sense to anyone but those around me. yeah, science is a glamorous profession.

[azuremonkey.livejournal.com]

That's horrible, the story about people stampeding over each other. But, on the other hand, a good price on equipment... in that same situation, I wonder how polite I'd be. Probably not much. But, I'm more of a biter than a pusher.

[dknightshade.livejournal.com]

You know, I know someone who worked for DARPA who had some great stories. DARPA being the crazy guys who try to do things that are easily ten years out -- like trying to create vehicles that can independently navigate the desert between Los Angeles and Las Vegas (I think it's Vegas). He has stories of being on tests in Alaska and having to carry a gun because of the polar bears and being involved in a submarine test dive. I could easily see him writing a very good book. And what about people like Tom Clancy and Michael Critchen?

Science is good. Science is interesting. Okay straight up research might not be the best thing to write a book on, but there are things about science that are interesting to the general public.

-Shady
(who for some odd reason feels like defending her profession today. ;-) )

[dknightshade.livejournal.com]

Books, screenplays, whatever. ;-)

[jebbypal]

Writing a book, yes, can see that. But the point is that the Pentagon wants them to write a screenplay to make science look "glamorous". Which to me would mean you'd have to be writing about something that actually could happen unlike the majority of Michael Crichton's work.

And yeah, the adventure test scientists, okay, cool, that's fun. And like I said, I can think of ways to make a screenplay w/ science work, but I can't guarantee that it would actually show scientists in a good light and actually represent the truth.

Cause 90% of actual research science is boring number crunching or repetitive tasks no matter what field you are in, IMO. there are people who get off on that kind of thing, but they aren't exactly someone you could portray realistically and get a ten year old to think science was "glamorous" or "cool".

*shrugs* But I have a very negative opinion of most scientists based solely on the fact that I think they overestimate their own importance. Half you could replace with machines and get more reliable results.