24 June 2009

The Dolphin Man comes to an end

Don't read this blog post! It is the ending of The Dolphin Man, a publishing experiment.

If you are intrigued, start here - this is a blog you have to read backwards, starting in November last year and finishing just the other day. How it all began...

"For the few who knew I’d left, I have arrived.
Who am i?
Some people call me the dolphin man. That is all you need to know for now.
Where am I?
That is a secret: a Top Secret.
Why am I here?
I am a researcher (I dislike the word ‘scientist’) and I work with dolphins. I investigate the way dolphins communicate with each other and other pods of dolphins that may be swimming many miles away across the ocean.
Most scientists doubt that this possible that this is possible over the scale – hundreds of miles – that I’m interested in. These are the same scientists that say that dolphins don’t have a true language as such, just some fancy one-way signalling, as opposed to true two-way communication.
I will spend the next three to five years here and I will prove the sceptics wrong.
In the meantime, there’s just me, and this blog. I have a laptop with satellite broadband Internet. It would be a bit of a waste to sit here hiding from the world."
Enjoy! 

24 Jun 2009 20:53:36 | Weblogs

2 Comments

Dorte H

Don´t read this! - and that is from a person who is so afraid of spoilers LOL

Tonight, I am too tired to read the ending of anything anyway, but perhaps after a good night´s sleep ...

My holidays began today, and usually that is like getting a new life - at least for a few weeks.

Posted by: Dorte H | 25 June 2009 at 21:54

Maxine

Lucky you to be beginning a holiday, Dorte - have a lovely time. We still have some time to go here before ours, as the schools don't finish in the UK until the end of July.

Posted by: Maxine | 26 June 2009 at 08:13

The comments to this entry are closed.

NEXT POST
Individuality in the online age General interest is out, niche is in - according to an article in The Atlantic on why the Economist is thriving while Time and Newsweek fade. "The Economist has reached its current level of influence and importance because it is, in every sense of the word, a true global digest for an age when the amount of undigested, undigestible information online continues to metastasize. And that’s a very good place to be in 2009." Michael Hirschorn describes how the Economist (by accident or design) more or less ignored the online revolution and the desperate urge to be "relevant" on the web, and has hence remained a valuable print product - valuable that is to readers and to the owners, an enviable double-whammy for publications these days. The Economist is not innovative or intellectual, according to Hirschorn: "The “leaders,” or main articles, tend to “urge” politicians to solve complex problems, as if the key to, say, reconstituting the global banking system were but a simple act of cogitation away. A typical leader, from January, on the ongoing Gaza violence was an erudite, deeply historical write-around on Arab-Israeli violence that ended up arriving at the same conclusion everyone else arrived at long...
PREVIOUS POST
End of the line for science journalism? Although I say it myself, there are some really stimulating, readable and fascinating articles in Nature this week (25 June issue) about science, journalism and communication with the lay public. Most of this post is taken from a Nature Network forum post: you're welcome to join in the discussion there. Many researchers see science journalists as a public-relations service or as an ally in spreading the news about their work, asserts a Nature Editorial this week (459, 1033; 2009 – free to read online). The Editorial points out that there is a deeper value of journalism: to cast a fair but sceptical eye over everything in the public sphere — science included. This kind of scrutiny is easy for researchers to applaud when a news report questions dodgy statistics or dubious claims about uncertainties in evolution. It is not so easy when the story takes a critical look at animal-research practices, overblown claims about climate change or scientists’ conflicts of interest. But such examinations are to the benefit of society, which needs to see science scrutinized as well as regurgitated, and journalists are an essential part of that process. This week’s Nature special issue, of which the Editorial is a...

Maxine

Science editor who likes reading crime fiction

Search

Become a Fan

My Other Accounts

Recent Comments