INTRO: Soapbox Science is a program that performs direct public outreach and makes scientists immediately available to the public, rather than be hidden away or overshadowed by sensationalism in the mainstream media.
MERITS: Allowing scientists to engage with the general public is a great way to humanize them and make their work available to the public. It is a much-needed approach that has slid into the background, especially with the rise of barriers social media presents.
CRITIQUE: Although the manuscript addresses how the public might see scientists as being bad communicators, I think there is also some truth to that. The presentation should also address how scientists who might not have great communication skills will overcome this barrier, too.
DISCUSSION: The topic is relevant to the current climate of science communication (its rise and effectiveness), and I agree that direct, active interaction with the public is needed (rather than passive, ie: waiting for the public to approach scientists/science centers). As stated above, touch on how scientists who might not have strong communication will be able to present their work without a third-party, if necessary.
- - -
INTRO: The proposal focuses on an inclusive and accessible science outreach activity that has been positively received by audiences and praised by participants. It is a venture that audiences will be interested to hear more about, both because they might want to take part in the future and because it might inspire the pursuit of other innovative, accessible scicomm activities.
MERITS: Soapbox Science is an increasingly popular annual outreach event that empowers scientists to discuss their own research in an accessible way without the use of media as a 'middle man', while also giving communities an opportunities to access researchers directly and in-person. It has been an excellent initiative for taking science to the people rather than forcing people to do the leg work, and often the presenters are, themselves, from typically underrepresented groups; thus, it is an important initiative not just for educating the public but also breaking down barriers. It is an important activity for audiences to hear about because it emphasises that science communicators should consider inclusivity and accessibility when considering their outreach efforts.
CRITIQUE: There are no weaknesses in the proposal.
DISCUSSION: I have no changes to recommend.
- - -
INTRO: This proposal presents a novel approach to engaging the public with science, and in particular women's research and experiences in science. The talk wil provide a case study of the Soapbox Science program, and hopefully inspire creativity and other novel approaches to engaging diverse groups with science.
MERITS: The proposed contribution is appealing as it offers an unique case where women scientsits engage with public audiences about their resarch. The presentation will offer insights into the program, and will share new advances that are being used to diversify the way that scientists engage with the public.
CRITIQUE: There are no weaknesses in this proposal.
DISCUSSION: There are no weaknesses in this proposal.