This is my page. Here, I get to talk every month about whatever I want. I like that.
The editorial staff (there's half-a-dozen besides me) decide what's going to be in the magazine each month, and what stories we are going to report on the Web site every day. We like that too.
But things could be a lot - a whole lot - more interesting.
What if, instead of being a passive consumer of The Scientist, our readers played a role in shaping the content? We could have 700, or 7,000, minds thinking up and debating great story ideas, instead of just seven. Such a community could identify breakthrough research and commercialization opportunities before they received widespread attention. Or decide on the fields and firms that are being oversold. It could identify scandals, tag the unrecognized heroes and geniuses of science and business, and work out and test ways ...
