Some science shows... and their brilliant visuals.

A friend of mine commented that she did not know of any good science programmes, and even if there were any, she expressed doubt about the abundance of visuals. I admired her concern, of course, but then I was also stunned that she would think the latter. The universe is the playground of the scientist: whatever need be explained on TV, the visuals are everywhere we look!

Nonetheless, here is a list of science programmes that I've enjoyed watching - both for the excellent narration and beautiful imagery that all of them proffered and proffer.

1. Presented by Brian Cox, a physicist who was the sexiest man alive according to People magazine in 2009 (a rare honour, no doubt), Wonders of the Universe is a 2011 series produced by the BBC, Discovery Channel and Science Channel. First broadcast by the well-funded commercial-free BBC Two channel, the series has four episodes, each of which analyses a wonderful aspect of the universe and presents a wonder central to the theme. In the order they were broadcast, they are time, elements, gravitation and the unique properties of light. Archives are available here.
   


2. In support of the Out of Africa Theory is Dr Alicia May Roberts, with a curious arsenal of specializations: osteoarchaeology, anthropology, paleopathology, and anatomy. Her show, called The Incredible Human Journey, tracks and explains the evidence on support of early human migrations out of Africa and the subsequent distribution of people around the globe. The show was first broadcast on BBC television in 2009, and includes scenes shot on location from each of the continents it travels to. Overall, it's a five-episode documentary with each episode catering to one continent. Dr Roberts has appeared on other programmes such as Coast, Don't Die Young, Time Team, and Digging for Britain. Archives are available here.
   


3. What list of science programmes is complete without those of the legendary Jacques Cousteau?! A production of his titled The Underwater Odyssey of Commander Cousteau is my favourite: with the unremitting French accent and great humour of his, the show explored the oceans, reefs, underwater plateaus and seabeds, and other occupants of a world without sun. Unfortunately, I'm unable to track down the archives of this show. To make up for that, here's an interview of René Heuzey, the cameraman on the TUOFCC.
   


4. Another show I really admire isn't exactly a show as much as select clips chosen by Sir David Attenborough from the BBC Archives. A famed environmentalist, Sir Attenborough had an illustrious career in television lasting for more than half a century. His joy of watching wildlife was not only infectious but also pandemic: the amount of research he put into each episode of the nine-part Life series won him the everlasting respect of the scientific community, and the 253-episode Wildlife on One garnered a weekly viewership of eight to ten million.

I'll stop the list here for two reasons: first, I haven't had time to watch more, and second, if you start to watch these programmes, you will not have time to  watch more. As for those looking for more programmes, I suggest a detour to the BBC Science & Nature TV and Radio Programme Index. They have a host of other wonderful shows that are, in my opinion, a must watch.

No Candy For Right. Lesser Candy For Wrong.

Enough has been said over the last 10 years about the deluge of information on the web, and on the TV, the radio and the papers. All of it has contributed – one way or another – to change the way we look at the world around us; significant bits of it have even gone on to dictate newer with which we can interact with it. Unsurprisingly, however, there is also in place a different protocol, an upgraded one, that includes a new set of mistakes we could commit, a new set of implications and an altogether new rewards program, speaking as such, for not committing those mistakes in the first place.

Amongst them, there is a certain “mistake profile” that strategically underlies a lot of mistakes committed by unifying them with one principle: “doing it right makes no difference, doing it wrong makes a world of it”, and this kind of mistake has become more common; so common, in fact, that in some institutions, of investigations and reportage to be specific, they have attained the critical pedestal of being called systematic simply because they are not corrected even if exposed glaringly.

[caption id="attachment_317" align="aligncenter" width="386" caption="The Indian division of CNN"][/caption]

Commas once held the privileged position of inducing the most of such mistakes in writing. Using the commas in the right place leaves the reader with a smooth flow of thought, although he or she would ultimately take away the point being made at the end of the reading session. However, once the writer uses a comma in the wrong place, that sudden jerk in the flow of thought leaves the reader only with a dissonance that lasts the whole time – and he or she is bound to leave without giving a damn about your ideas. So also in reportage: just today, I was watching CNN-IBN cover the story of the Indian Navy capturing a pirate vessel off the coast of “Lakshwadeep”. If the presenter had pronounced it right, it would have gone a very short distance, if at all, in corroborating the care taken by the presenter to pronounce it correct. However, the moment she pronounced it wrong, it gave away a sense of journalistic nonchalance - especially when there is no hurry associated with covering the piece.

As long as the media is under the scanner, there is a critical difference between “showing” and “telling” that needs to be discussed. In order to understand this, consider the genre of creative writing: when such a piece is being constructed, the author needs to state something to the reader, not declare it. Similarly, facts need to be presented separately wherever possible, and not as cause and effect. This ensures the utmost neutrality even when an extremely suggestive event is unfolding. Such is the difference between statement and declaration. I principally address the contexts of writing and reporting first because they address a larger audience and quickly. However, there are other industries that face significant challenges in the long run because they didn’t look before they leapt.

---

The writer, at this point, was struck by a writers’ block arrow and regrets announcing that the article is done.