When science bloggers attack: Sizzle mockumentary causes split

Cyndy Aleo-Carreira — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 14:43:38 -0700

Science bloggers. We envision them as straight-laced, toe-the-line, pocket-protector-wearing nerds. Right?

Wrong. These stereotypes are being smashed to pieces as the online science community reacts to the controversy over Sizzle: A Global Warming Comedy, which is opening the Woods Hole Film Festival this Saturday.

The film, a mockumentary in which the cameraman frequently interjects comments of disbelief that global warming even exists, has created a rift in the science blog community, demonstrated by comments from Chris Mooney at The Intersection:

"After all, here we have an innovative attempt, by a scientist-filmmaker who is one of us and part of our community, to reach new demographics with information about one of our recurrent and core topics--global warming. In short, Sizzle represents the kind of effort that we ought to be promoting vigorously, selflessly, and with enthusiasm--especially given the lack of much available funding for this kind of experiment in Hollywood from major studios."

Mooney's fellow science blogger, an NIH-funded biomedical research scientist who goes by the nom de plume DrugMonkey, responded with outrage:

"Because many ScienceBloggers think the film is not funny, is not 'pro-science,' and basically sucks s***. I'm not sure I understand what is so f***ing complicated about this...Science is about reality, not wishful thinking. It should not be surprising that scientists who think a movie sucks are gonna be honest about it, rather than keeping silent--or even lying--so that the maker of the movie can 'bring this community along with him.'"

I have friends in the scientific community, and I believe DrugMonkey's response would be echoed by many. I know one NPR contributor who can stay riled for at least 30 minutes after merely mentioning the movie 10,000 BC. The reason, as this friend has stated repeatedly, is not that science shouldn't be entertaining, but that it shouldn't mix fact with fiction as part of that entertainment. As confusing as science is to many members of the general public, some of the inconsistencies and humor that many "get" (as Mr. Mooney put it) can also breed misinformation and confusion.

The conflict between the two blogging factions is bringing the movie to the mainstream press, and will probably improve its box office. At the very least, the movie will probably sell more tickets to the science blog readers who want to see what all the fuss is about.

More news, commentary, and predictions from The Industry Standard:

News: EFF still fighting MPAA and selectable output control
News: Doctors, PHDs to edit new Wikipedia of medical information
News: First there was Moore's Law; now, 'Gore's Law'?