When I do #SciComm training, I say “you’re not dumbing anything down because you’re not talking to dumb people. You’re talking to people who are smart at something different from what you’re smart at.” I find that perspective helps

📌

Love it, thanks.

Assume your audience is intelligent but not necessarily knowledgeable about this particular topic, is the way I approach it. They’ll get it if you explain it clearly

I've been on an anti-dumb-down campaign for decades. People can handle nuance and complexity. Science communications is about making ideas relatable, not simplistic.

I love it, thank you

Exactly. Geneticists tend to be bright. Astrophysicists tend to be bright. Forensic accounting experts tend to be bright. Broadly speaking, they would not be able to understand each other's journal articles. That doesn't mean they're "dumb." It just means they lack shared expertise.

Sometimes I remind scientists that most of them don't know how to change a tire, fix their own sink, wire their electrical. They don't know how to make a perfect football pass or a cut crease. These are all types of expertise, they're just different, and NOT less worthy.

One of the best editors I ever had taught me: "Write like your audience is smarter than you, but lacks your experience."