In November 2007, Donald Kennedy, then-editor of the prestigious journal Science, announced that for the next five issues, each of the research articles would include a brief "author's summary" written in plain language. This was being done as part of a publishing experiment by the journal because, as Kennedy put it,

It's clear that accessibility is a problem, because we're all laypeople these days: Each specialty has focused in to a point at which even the occupants of neighboring fields have trouble understanding each others' papers.

Some of the more general and widely read journals, such as Science and Nature, already had summaries like these written by others (either experts or science writers) to make a small number of the "sexiest" papers in each issue more understandable to the readership, but this approach is novel as it applies to more papers and is contributed by the original authors.

In reporting on this, University Affairs has printed a story entitled "Popularize or perish", in which Jacob Berkowitz makes the broader point that achievment in making one's research accessible to the public is becoming part of the academic review process. I know that I certainly provide details about my activities in this sphere during annual reviews. This includes not just participation in media stories (e.g., interviews) but also blogging. That is to say, the fact that you are reading blogs like this matters to an increasing proportion of practicing scientists.

As I see it, discovering new details about how the world works is only one part of the role of Science 2.0. The other, equally important side is to explain these observations, both in terms of providing mechanistic accountings of them but also in making this information open to nonspecialists.

Presenting new and exciting information to non-scientists in an accessible, interesting, and not least of all accurate way should be among the primary objectives of modern professional scientists. The earlier tendency of many scientists to look down upon (or "saganize") popularizers is an obsolete attitude. As Berkowitz argues, it is not an issue of "dumb it down", but "story it up". Blogs, author summaries, interaction with the media, and other means can all be used to substantial effect in this endeavour. The fact that many academic institutions are beginning to recognize the importance of such activities is a positive sign that the ivory tower of old is at least having more windows installed. I, for one, will enjoy the added light.