Debate : 14399


Off-Topic / Debate / 14399	14398 \| 14400

Subject:	Doing the Discover Mag Rag (Was: At last, a Federal program we can all support.)
Newsgroups:	lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2001 08:46:29 GMT
Viewed:	268 times

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes: > I don't know what bothers me more--that the Discovery Channel (and its > siblings) posture themselves as serious proponents of science, or that the > Discovery Channel Store sells magnetic insoles (and their siblings) as if > they have any physical therapeutic benefit whatsoever. (Not that Discover magazine really has anything to do with Discovery Communications Inc., but still...) So here's a little story. I'm in the position where, to compliment my National Geographic collection, I'm looking for a subscription to any one popular science magazine (1) and was taking a long, hard look at Discover. I used to really like the magazine, and had something of a soft spot for it, even though I knew from day one that it was just another Disney publication with some disturbing new-agey pseudoscientific garbage. I have come to think that this fondness I held was due to my being incredibly naive when I first started reading it. Then, recently, I acquired my parents' collection starting from 1989 and ranging to last month's. And wow, what a long strange trip it's been... Looking through the older issues, it does seem that there were some fantastic articles in each one, more so than in a typical issue today. However, the majority of the ads then were pretty much limited to the forgettable conscience-expanding-universe-harmonizing-crystal-alignment-audio-tapes and herbal-products-so-good-you'll-swear-off-modern-medicine junk. It was then, and is still today, an odd combo. Looking at today's issues, they're taking more "legitimate" (mainstream) ads, but the articles are more and more of the seven-page-paid-ad-for-herbal-products-so-good-you'll-swear-off-modern-medicine-masquerading-as-an-article (2) variety, invariably praising untested and/or unreviewed Breakthroughs In Science, with questionable references to pseudoscientific Experts. Throw in a dash of Technobabble for good measure. It's also interesting to note that they've silently dropped the text "The World of Science" from their title "Discover The World of Science", presumably because "Discover The World of Pseudoscientific Mumbo-Jumbo And Sensationalist New Age Mysticism Because It Pays Us A Whole Lot More" took up too much space in the masthead... I'm thinking of taking the time to measure the increase in ad quality and charting that against the decrease in article quality, perhaps comparing it against similar trends in other Disney venues such as ABC programming and their stranglehold in the Happy Meals racket. But then that would take WORK -- and besides, by Discover magazine's standards, we're all Experts anyhow and we don't need to offer evidence for our findings. So, fellow Experts... Which science magazine do you think I should get? I'm thinking of something that dumbs things down a tiny bit so as to aim for the general population (so Nature and Science are, sadly, out), without getting too silly (adios, Discover). I'm really leaning towards Scientific American, New Scientist, or Science News... Any critiques? suggestions? flames? Um, ok, rant over. :-, Cheers, - jsproat 1. barring, of course, Popular Science as it's really Popular Mechanics but with only half the automotive articles...a good read, but not really science-oriented 2. In fact, the only difference I can see between a typical modern Discover magazine article and the huge Texaco 16-page ad spreads is that the Texaco ads are clearly marked at the top of the page as advertisement. I wouldn't have so much of an issue with Discover if they marked their front-cover-article-hailing-a-better-cholesterol-drug-on-the-market-soon stuff as ads too; it would make finding the decent articles *so* much easier...

Message has 3 Replies:

		Re: Doing the Discover Mag Rag (Was: At last, a Federal program we can all support.)
(...) I would favor Scientific American but that's just because I've never read the other two. I find SA to be a very absorbing read. But it's not a read while watching TV sort of rag, you need to give it your full attention to get what the articles (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

		Re: Doing the Discover Mag Rag (Was: At last, a Federal program we can all support.)
(...) Well, if you're only looking to maintain the status quo of scientific integrity, Weekly World News isn't too much of a leap away from Discover! I don't follow many science journals too regularly, though I'll pick up an occasional Scientific (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

		Re: Doing the Discover Mag Rag (Was: At last, a Federal program we can all support.)
(...) Science News. It's thin. It's weekly. It summarizes the findings from all the real journals with enough reference that you can go get the whole article if you want to. And you can always pick up the especially interesting Scientific American (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: At last, a Federal program we can all support.
(...) It's like those shows on the Discovery Channel that quote "UFO experts" or "experts in the paranormal." How the heck does someone qualify as a UFO expert? Has he "seen" a bunch of UFOs? Has he heard a lot of stories about UFOs? Did he see (...) (23 years ago, 29-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

18 Messages in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact

Custom Search