I'm not out to be a big jerk and point at exactly which blogs I looked at, so instead I've done this by network.
Looking at Scienceblogging.com between about 11:45-1245 est today, I looked at the first 12 blog networks listed, and then looked at the 5 posts under each heading. And then I made this table:
|click to enlarge|
A few notes:
- I tried to use a colour-code from green (properly linked and cited) to red (what are you thinking?).
- If the image was clearly the author's own, (a photo of them, perhaps) I included that in the green bar, as a properly cited and linked image.
- I didn't count videos.
- I only counted images in the body of the post, not the sidebar or banner.
- Weird the Scienceblogs.com posts had no images whatsoever in that small random sampling.
- Not enough science bloggers use paintings or illustrations. I'm available for hire.
- Wired came off looking good to my eyes.
- I ain't gonna point to anyone. But a couple of these had the Research Blogging badge on the posts with zero image citations or links. Are we to automatically infer we have to go back to the paper for those?
It'd be interesting to do this periodically to see the trends look like.
- - - - - - - -
Original artwork on The Flying Trilobite Copyright to Glendon Mellow
under Creative Commons Licence.