Oct 12 2013

Scientific American has its reasons

But what are they?

Editor in chief and Senior VP Mariette DiChristina explained on Twitter

Re blog inquiry: @sciam is a publication for discovering science. The post was not appropriate for this area & was therefore removed.

And got what is apparently an infinite number of replies – the page is still loading and I’ve been reading and scrolling for several minutes. The replies are stinging and clarifying.

A few:

Christie Wilcox @NerdyChristie

.@mdichristina Since when does @sciam censor blogs for lacking science content? No one took down my posts like this: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/science-sushi/2012/11/12/musical-monday-stay-near-me/ ….

Maggie Koerth-Baker @maggiekb

Expectation of free work is big deal. Treatment of women who refuse paradigm, even more.

Seth Zenz @sethzenz

Science blogging is best w/ writers’ work/lives. You picked a very bad time to define it narrowly.

Janet D Stemwedel @docfreeride

Can you please clarify what “discovering science” means in context of @SciAmBlogs? cc @BoraZ

Martin Robbins @mjrobbins

This is a complete and utter screw up on your part. The sooner you guys get on top of it, the better.

Mariette DiChristina responded:

@hannahjwaters @sciam @BoraZ @DNLee5 “Partner” connection not a factor.

More infinite responses:

Ben Lillie @BenLillie

@mdichristina @hannahjwaters @boraz @dnlee5 Doesn’t matter. Pulling that post sends an incredibly bad message for diversity and support.

Chris Clarke @canlistrans

@mdichristina a staggeringly bad decision on scism’s part. Not too late to fix it. @hannahjwaters @sciam @BoraZ @DNLee5

The editor in chief says the reason was not the partner connection, but does not say what the reason was. Hm.


  1. 1
    SC (Salty Current), OM

    Re blog inquiry: @sciam is a publication for discovering science. The post was not appropriate for this area & was therefore removed.

    It’s like she started with a Mad Lib and filled it in wrong. Should have been:

    sciam is a publication for discovering science. CALLING OUR BLOGGER A WHORE was not appropriate & we are therefore ending our partnership with BO.

    Responses should read:

    sciam is a publication for discovering science. Deleting Lee’s post was not appropriate & I will therefore stop reading or supporting SciAm.

  2. 2

    Wish I could boycott, but regardless of gender I’m so out of cotts I never even read SciAm at the Liberallary.

    When visiting my daughter, I sometimes re-read the 2007 copy of a Skandinävish popular sci/tech mag they keep in the loo. To its credit, it never yet called anyone a whore, to my knowledge; a relatively immense bonus.

  3. 3
    Al Dente

    At least two other blog posts, one from FTB’s Dana Hunter, are on SciAm blogs. Dr. Lee’s post is apparently the only one which was pulled.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>