Content Roundup: November 2011

November started out with an idea and ended with a cancer quack, and it continues the high activity from October. I’m continuing to post once or twice weekly at JREF’s blog, and there is lots going on over on Twitter including Delta Airlines running anti-vaccine videos, Power Balance going bankrupt, Kevin Trudeau losing an expensive appeal, and the ongoing Burzynski Clinic saga. So if you missed some of the action during November, here’s a way to catch up.

This is the monthly roundup – links to all the content I’ve been involved with in the last month. It includes this blog as well as the stuff I post on other blogs, my podcasting activities, my best posts on Twitter as well as key shout-outs or mentions elsewhere.

Read on to see what you missed!

Blogging

Here were my blog posts this month. A good mix of stuff. Not quite the one-per-week posting rate I’ve been trying to achieve here at Skeptools, but I’ll get there eventually.

Mentions and follow-ups on other blogs:

Podcasting

I contributed Skeptic History segments to these episodes of Skepticality:

Some shout-outs and mentions on other podcasts:

Social Media

I posted on Twitter:

  • 176 regular tweets, including:
    • 22 “What’s the harm in…?” stories
    • 30 Skeptic History facts
  • 113 replies to other Twitter posts

Here are highlights, the tweets that were retweeted the most. It starts, as it often does, with a compelling What’s the Harm:

(~10 retweets)

Some activism against anti-vaccine propaganda:

(~18 and ~10 retweets)

A heartbreaking vaccine story:

(~29 retweets)

Everyone loves Carl:

(~15 retweets)

A What’s the Harm from up north in Canada:

(~13 retweets)

The demise of PowerBalance was big news:

(~30 retweets)

A What’s the Harm in Austin:

(~10 retweets)

A cancer quack named Burzynski was big skeptic news near the end of November:

(~10 retweets)

So I proposed a little crowdsourcing:

(~13 retweets & a mention by Phil Plait)

And in 4 hours this was the result:
This warning message is what you see if you visit BurzynskiClinic.com with Web of Trust loaded.

What’s the Harm got into Burzynski mode:

(~11 retweets)

To get these as I post them, you should follow me on Twitter here.

Crowdsourcing Contributions

Here were my contributions to various projects this month:

I contributed 51 edits to Wikipedia.

I rated 16 sites on Web of Trust and left 2 comments.

I made 11 edits to the Skeptic History database. It now has 1379 items. (Plus I have a queue of several other items waiting to go in).

And on we go into December…

About these ads

About Tim Farley
Focused on online misinformation, Tim Farley is a software engineer, computer security expert and scientific skeptic who created the site What's The Harm. He is a Past Fellow of the James Randi Educational Foundation.

3 Responses to Content Roundup: November 2011

  1. sgerbic says:

    I don’t know where to read Dave Slusher’s disagreement of your presentation. I did read Don Lacey’s comment.

    November 18: Evil Genius Chronicles: There Are Too Many Skeptic Podcasts (Dave Slusher vehemently disagrees with the premise of my Skepticamp presentation)

    • Tim Farley says:

      I’m confused, are you saying you couldn’t find Dave Slusher’s commentary? It’s hyperlinked right there to the left of his name, in this post.

  2. sgerbic says:

    I didn’t find it the first time because your hyperlink is named the same as your presentation which is the same name of his blog. So I clicked on “your presentation” and saw those comments. I didn’t click on the former because I thought it would just take me to your blog on “too many podcasts”. I’m kinda slow on the uptake Tim.

    I found his blog, and tried to rein myself in. But he hit a top topic button for me. He said that editing Wikipedia was clerical work and “not sexy” like doing a podcast or blog. Yikes! This attitude kills me.

    Put down your fricking comic book and take a look around the world. Education is our only hope. You might think that lack of critical thinking is someone elses problem, so what if they take homeopathy, so what if they kill their kid by not vaccinating them, so what if they pray over their dying parent instead of getting them medical treatment. That’s their problem right? NO, it is our problem. Besides the ethical issues of harming their family member (their child has no say in the matter) these people vote. They decide on the changes to our way of life. They outnumber us by some crazy percent.

    If the skeptical community wants to sit on their couch and watch TV and read comic books while these loonies run over your rights, then I take issue with that. Guess I’m still a bit HOT. Better go do some un-sexy clerical work on Wikipedia and calm myself down.

    Susan

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 12,679 other followers