Re: dinosaurs and the media

[paleo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Glen J. Kuban )]

You wrote: 
>
>Even for dinosaurs, media coverage isn't necessarily very good.  The
>popular versions I saw of the recent Science article only mentioned "maybe
>bigger then T. rex" and ignored most of the rest of the paper.  Reporting
>of something tends to reflect the publicity (or maybe even just the fact
>that a reporter happened along), rather than its scientific merit. 

I think a lot of this has to do with what some call the "est" effect.  The 
public is naturally drawn to anything that be described with words ending in 
"est":  "biggest," "oldest," "heaviest," "tallest," "fastest," etc.  And 
among these, "biggest" usually attracts more attention than "smallest."

Sadly, we have enough trouble getting the average person to undestand that 
dinosaurs did not live with humans, let alone appreciate or learn anything 
about microfossils or even invertebrates.  

Glen J. Kuban
paleo@ix.netcom.com