Why Popular Science mag is junk

Discussion in 'Community' started by Les Kern, Nov 22, 2004.

  1. Les Kern macrumors 68040

    Les Kern

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Location:
    Alabama
  2. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #2
    Posted before several weeks ago.

    It's also a known fake, so I don't know if Pop Science would publish this.
     
  3. Les Kern thread starter macrumors 68040

    Les Kern

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Location:
    Alabama
    #3
    Crap. Not like me to post without checking it out.....
     
  4. DanTekGeek macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #4
    ive been getting popsci for about 5 years, and i love it. yes, it dosent have the intelectual fortitude of "Nature" or "Scientific American", but all of the stories in it are good quality.
     
  5. wdlove macrumors P6

    wdlove

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    #5
    Don't worry Les Kern, you are just human everyone makes mistakes.

    My father used to get Popular Science, its a great source of science information. Information for the average person.
     
  6. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #6
    I consider SciAm to be probably the best layman's scientific magazine (definitely better than PopSci, from what I recall about PopSci--although that article about the worst jobs was very interesting). Nature has the more technical material (i.e., formal papers, with actual discussion of methods, etc.) and all of the people in my lab have...err...to put it crudely...wet dreams about publishing in it.
     
  7. Les Kern thread starter macrumors 68040

    Les Kern

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Location:
    Alabama
    #7
    Popular Science in my humble opinion is nothing mre than doctor's office fluff. I subscribe to SciAm, but on occasion baffles me with its complexity on certain subjects. I'd put in the catagory "WAY better than PopSci, but not IMPOSSIBLE to read like my wife's "Laboratory Science" or other high-end specific mags.
     
  8. mowogg macrumors 6502

    mowogg

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2004
    Location:
    San Gabriel, CA
    #8
    Wither PopSci

    Back in the 1960s and 70s Popular Science was a terrific magazine with a broad range of articles. It was much better than that creepy magazine- Popular Mechanics.
    PopSci has been suffering the fate of Mac magazines of late. It is getting thinner and thinner as competition erodes its core market base. With so many print and cable subsitutes for "layman science" available it makes it difficult to compete.
    I wonder how PopSci compares to Discovery Channel magazine in readership and advert sales?
     
  9. jsw Moderator emeritus

    jsw

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    Location:
    Andover, MA
    #9
    I like PopSci's "Best of What's New", which always shows some cool stuff. However, as mentioned, the "Science" part of the title is pretty lacking.

    SciAm is good. Rarely all that "deep" but consistently interesting. I'm a big fan of Science Magazine myself.
     
  10. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #10
    That's probably a fair assessment. I think that for the most part, SciAm does a good job of providing thoughtful, comprehensive, but broad and digestable reviews of subjects. The big difference, besides less complexity overall, is a focus on the relatively broad as opposed to Nature and Science's very, very specific.
     

Share This Page