London Blog

MediaGuardian 100: New Goal for Scientists?

The MediaGuardian 100 list has been released, listing the 100 most powerful people in the media. Influence is measured in the UK, but nominees can be internationally based, and unsurprisingly number one is the American Mark Zuckerberg.

The top 100 this year has been judged on “cultural influence, economic clout and political power” and includes people from newspapers, magazines, television, the internet, politics and independents, but, I notice, no scientists. Of course the list is just one snapshot of power, voted for by a panel, but with sci-comm our business, I wonder: taking a look at some of the people who have made it this year, who in the science world might fancy an early New Year’s Resolution to make it next year?

Comments

  1. Report this comment

    Lee Turnpenny said:

    Influence regardless of benignity or malignity, eh?

    So expect # 6 and # 11 to remain up there, whatever happens to them. But where, then, is Brooks (she was # 16 last year)? # 37 warrants higher positioning here for going after them.

    1. 20 is a joke, surely. Unless you can be deemed highly influential by being wholly ineffectual. He is not ‘leading the way.’ Where is the BS, who, if # 74 gets included, should be in for his hob-nobbing alone? Guess he should have discussed inappropriate matters.
    1. 17 makes me shudder. # 25 makes me angry.

    As for science… I wonder, with the ‘Defamation Bill’ in progress, that Simon Singh should be there (he wasn’t on last year’s either). And the big cheeses of the big funding bodies are highly influential (aren’t they?), but tend not to make the news.

Comments are closed.