Conrad Hackett

My understanding is that they are trying to verify accounts that might be at greatest risk of impersonation. I assume one constraint is personnel. They are trying to get around this by setting up some employers (e.g., media companies) to verify staff.

Chart showing more than half of Americans (53%) say America’s sport is football – about twice the share who say it’s baseball (27%). Much smaller shares choose one of the other four sports we asked about: basketball (8%), soccer (3%), auto racing (3%) or hockey (1%). We also included the option for Americans to write in another sport. The most common answers volunteered were golf, boxing, rodeo and ice skating.

The sport that is 'America's sport,' according to US adults:
Football 53%
Baseball 27%
Basketball 8%
Soccer 3%
Auto racing 3%
Hockey 1%
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/02/05/by-a-wide-margin-americans-say-football-not-baseball-is-americas-sport/

@bogers.bsky.social Have you seen the essay below? It’s provocative, but the communication strategy outlined is a lot for the most scholars bsky.app/profile/conr...

It seems to me that a big challenge is if one wants to reach beyond one’s research niche, it takes a lot of work to build a broader network on social media.

Twitter had about 408k blue check verified accounts before Musk took over.

Yup, me, the NE Ohio Regional Sewer District @neorsd.org & a few pals.

On the “lists” tab of @verified.pds.mmatt.net’s profile, you can see lists of accounts verified by various media outlets and by Bluesky itself.

There are about 4k blue check verified accounts on Bluesky.

About 1 in 4 U.S. adults worry they or someone close to them could be deported About four-in-ten immigrants (43%) say they worry a lot or some, up from 33% in March.

About 1 in 4 U.S. adults worry they or someone close to them could be deported, according to a June @pewresearch.org survey.

What do you think will improve the reach of scientific discoveries?

Genuinely surprising and revealing that a majority of American men don’t really follow sports

And, fortunately, many wonderful people who still work there including @emgusk.bsky.social @sfcpoll.bsky.social @andrewvandam.bsky.social!

There are so many great people who no longer work at the Washington Post.

I guess most of us would like our research to have an impact. What role, if any, social media should have is an open question. I'm interested to hear more from those who explicitly aim to use social media to make an impact. For example, I think @drjenndowd.bsky.social has been very successful.

(1) Communicating or discussing research. So yes: likes, replies, reposts. (Pre-Elon pandemic Twitter was great. I even co-wrote a couple of op-eds.)
(2) Networking: developing new collaborations. @afriqair.bsky.social was basically founded on Twitter. Bluesky is too US-centric to replicate that.🧪

This site is great because it has the familiar Twitter UI. But now there's no longer any single site that has the same network breadth that the old Twitter had. I miss that and also struggle with the bandwidth limits of trying to be present on multiple platforms.

Here's a preprint of my chapter on Social Media from Citizen Scholar: Public Engagement for Social Scientists osf.io/v24dg_v1/. Includes some research on what people do and don't get out of it, some theory, and some advice. Good luck!

osf.io/preprints/so...

Thanks for sharing! Good advice! It's remarkable how the social media landscape is changing. Sorry that you've had all the negative experiences you describe.

a man wearing a hat and glasses is holding a clipboard with the word heart on it Alt: Adam Savage wearing a hat and glasses is holding a clipboard saying “remember kids, the only difference between screwing around and science is writing it down“

No particular goal, just chatting with cool people! The collabs and jobs just seem to have flowed naturally from that. My two biggest “breaks” (March for Science and my current job at #THRiVELab) emerged from “screwing around on twitter.”

Yes, a decade ago, I could share our global research on Twitter and get great feedback/critique from people all over the world. That was wonderful. Bluesky doesn't seem to have the kind of usage in Asia and Africa that Twitter had.

I am curious how often there's a mismatch between hopes for social media and what's feasible given limits of time, networks, competition for attention, etc.

My initial question quote-posted a message from @bogers.bsky.social about his forthcoming book with @mkeyoung.bsky.social on using social media for research impact.

Their intriguing book title led me to wonder how those who seek research impact on social media would measure impact.

How helpful has social media been for you in achieving these aims?

Yes, social media is great for connecting with people who have similar research interests. And sharing one's research within such a network seems feasible on social media. If this is one's goal, success could be measured by comments/likes/reposts from colleagues, right?

cc: @whysharksmatter.bsky.social @philipncohen.com @eszter.com

Social Media and News Fact Sheet Many Americans use social media for news: About a fifth or more regularly get news on Facebook, YouTube, Instagram and TikTok.

Yes, see www.pewresearch.org/journalism/f...

If you use social media for research impact, how do you define success? For example, are you most interested in sharing findings with colleagues/the world, attracting readers, discussing work, getting media coverage, securing a TED talk invite or something else? Do you have specific goals?
🧪

Ok but I get 100% of my Isaac Chotiner jokes on BlueSky.

reposted w/o photo

What is your 2025 take on The West Wing (1999-2006 tv show)?