Scientific American is the second feed I chose to subscribe to. Since science is my favorite subject and the field that I hope to go into, I thought that this magazine would interest me. Although there were several good articles, I was not very impressed with this feed. Unlike most feeds that are overflowing with new articles, Scientific American is only updated with new articles two or three times a month, however, the articles were very interesting, so I was very disappointed that I did not have much to read. Catchy titles like “Parasitized ants get berry sick” and “Smoking can’t buy happiness” steer me toward reading these articles instead of the ones with plain and boring titles. As I began reading the articles, I caught myself stumbling across several words that confused me. The writers had included very scientific words with no explanation. These words are fine for people with science backgrounds, but the magazine maybe could attract more readers if they explained these difficult words. If a person without a science background read these articles then they might have trouble getting any understanding out of what they are reading. People may begin to not enjoy reading these articles anymore if they cannot understand them and they may start veering away from reading this magazine. I really enjoyed reading this feed because science really fascinates me and I hope to someday pursue a career in science.
lhuff Said:
on August 17, 2008 at 8:43 pm
Texts in digital format do enable us to link to resources that provide definitions or give background information to help the reader. Perhaps, the magazine could benefit my fully utilizing hyperlinks–maybe?