Now, this is something I thought existed in a vague sense with the efforts of the Biotechnology Australia group, along with the availability of the CSIRO for consultation and other informal groups like the Australian Skeptics in this country… but Biotechnology Australia closed down this year and I know that checking science accuracy in the movies isn’t really what CSIRO does – and a lot of the time, it seems that people are complaining about the portrayal of science after the fact, rather than doing something about it to begin with.
But I am rather excited by this US group, mentioned in a recent post by Kirsten Sandford and announced a few days ago by Jennifer Ouellette -The Science and Entertainment Exchange:
The Science & Entertainment Exchange is a program of the National Academy of Sciences that provides entertainment industry professionals with access to top scientists and engineers to help bring the reality of cutting-edge science to creative and engaging storylines.
…By constructing an informational nexus between science and entertainment, The Exchange is able to facilitate a valuable connection between the two communities…Spanning the range of science topics, The Exchange can find experts that will work with you to identify and effectively portray the science details that complement a storyline.
Members include the likes of John Rennie, Steve Chu, Oliver Sacks, Steven Pinker, Dudley Herschbach, Brian Greene, Neil Gershenfeld and Adam Bly, along with the likes of Paula Apsell (Senior Executive Producer, NOVA; Director, WGBH Science Unit); Julie Gerberding (Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) and Sherry Lansing (Founder, Sherry Lansing Foundation) along with a few rather popular names in the film/tv industry like Rob Reiner, Frank Darabont and Dustin Hoffman. As I said, one of my fave bloggers, Jennifer Ouellette, is the Director of The Science and Entertainment Exchange! She wrote about her views on improving the situation for everyone:
… I’m convinced that while the constant snark directed at science in movies and TV might be entertaining to those in the “geek clique,” it is not, in the long run, constructive, or conducive to fostering change in how science is portrayed in Hollywood. It’s easy to point fingers and toss off zingy crowd-pleasing one-liners; it’s a lot more difficult to actually offer well-considered workable alternatives in a format that is easily accessible to those in the entertainment industry. It should be a “win-win” for both science and Hollywood in terms of fostering creative cooperation between the two groups. I think the Science and Entertainment Exchange has the right idea, and I’m delighted to have the chance to put the hypothesis to the test.
Yes, there are a range of pro-skepticism TV shows like Jonathan Creek, Mythbusters, Psych and even Bullshit that are created without such a consulting group, but I wonder if this was adopted more regularly world-wide – would we have an improvement of standards? At least it demonstrates to me that yes, the creation of such a consortium is possible and should be considered.
You must log in to post a comment.