Last updated on June 18, 2011
In an excellent interview with the Academy Health blog last week, Austin Frakt — who blogs along with my colleague Don Taylor over at the Incidental Economist — explains why policy-relevant academics should blog:
“To explain, consider the two sides: (1) researchers who know the body of scholarly work but may not necessarily be closely following the policy debate and (2) journalists and policymakers who know what the issues of the day are, but not the relevant research. So, there is a disconnect.
The traditional way of bridging the two worlds has been the press release. But think about when press releases occur. They are timed with the publication of a new study or paper. Well, that timing is driven by things unrelated to the policy debate: the securing of research funds, the trials of acquiring and analyzing data, the time to write the paper, the length of the review process, the journal’s production schedule, etc.
Consequently, very often a great study comes out, accompanied by a well-written press release, and it is irrelevant to the issue of the day. It then receives less attention than it deserves. The timing is wrong!
However, we should not then ignore that research when the issue gets hot later. That’s the right time to resurrect it, and to do so rapidly. Blogs, written by knowledgeable researchers and read by journalists and policymakers, can do that. A good quote or chart from the right paper at the right time can give that study, its authors, affiliated institutions, and funders visibility that they would otherwise not receive. Moreover, it can influence the debate and, one hopes, achieve better policy outcomes. Isn’t that the purpose of our work?”
(HT: Ezra Klein.)