Science Magazine Podcast

Reviews For Science Magazine Podcast

In a toxic ocean of vocal fry and uptalk Sarah Crespi is a beautiful tropical island to save us all. It is so refreshing to listen to a science podcast that isn’t singularly focused on COVID-19 and climate change. Sarahs interviews are weaved flawlessly with insightful questions and innocent humor. She is supremely intelligent and confident during the interview. The shows are expertly edited and the sound quality is excellent. If my daughter displays an interest in journalism or any professional audio career I will play this podcast for her and say “this is how to do it”
Great podcast. I really wish it was longer with more shows !! Quality science :)
Watered down pop science, overly political
Another “popular science” podcast that entertains by dumbing down, oversimplifying, and flat out ignoring facts that contradict a chosen narrative. Critical (skeptical) thinking is fundamental to science but is utterly lacking in these stories.
I just listened to the Dec 11th episode. After 10min of info came straight 2.5min of ads! I was biking and didn’t want to stop to fast forward. Those were painful 2.5min! I won’t listen to this podcast again when my hands are busy.
Hello! I love your podcast and I always like to listen to them from oldest to newest. For some reason it won’t let me listen to the next episode I am on which is from 2014 about down syndrome. Can you please fix it so I can continue to listen to your podcast? Can you please fix your podcast so I can listen to the rest of 2014 episodes and then move on to 2015? Please?
A few good episodes, then nothing but political brainwashing and political bashing. I can’t rate it anymore. I like science because it is unbiased and refreshes my brain, this podcast puts a spin on every subject I just unsubscribed. Later
This is a great podcast that goes in depth into science and explains stories in detail. Topics include covid19 and also lots of other interesting areas from ecology to anorexia, ancient societies and neurology.
Super informative!
It’s very interesting.
Can be a teeny bit dull at times but very useful, informative and reliably intelligent. Info is made accessible to a wide audience.
I am glad I get to listen to the science podcast as I get to work. Quick way to catchup on the latest. Love it!!
Bottom Line: Highly recommend for anyone who is curious about world around them! From reports on beehive viruses to racial biases in algorithms, to observing cancer cells in dogs from antiquity, this is a very informative podcast! Easy to listen to, and you don’t have to be a scientist or STEM person to love!!! Recommended to me by a friend with PhD in organic chemistry!
I hope they take time to talk about the data for aspirin and wether it really helps Or hurts populations where it is used prophylactially in assymptomatic people despite being sponsors by Bauer aspirin !!!!!

3/5

By AAASFan
Science podcast used to be great but it has really slipped.
I like how you will tell a lot about the topic and details instead of skipping over them. It allows me to have a much better understanding of the topic.
I want to like this podcast but it has all the personality of a beige wall, slowly drying. It’s not as if they don’t choose subjects that should be interesting, there’s plenty of potential, but it’s just not showing through. Where is your passion for your subject? Are you reading the questions and answers from auto cue? And what’s with that crap segue music? Yawn.
Pleb access, dull. Not useful.
I liked the former format with a few quick hits on science topics of general interest followed by a more in-depth look at one or two other topics. In addition to a less engaging format, the podcast also now often deals more with the process of scientific discovery than the discoveries. It is just less interesting.
It's great to find these well-produced podcasts that recap the last week of interesting science news. Casual, friendly delivery makes it accessible to non-scientists.
I find approximately 1 in 3 pieces very informative and fascinating. However, Science has succumbed to political correctness, putting a progressive spin on many stories by injecting opinions on top of the facts. Unfortunate.
Sarah is amazing. Love this podcast
Having problems subscribing, i click on the link but nothing happens??

5/5

By dbendy
By far my favorite science podcast and I listen to a lot of them. Love the host--she asks smart and intriguing questions and the content is always delightfully varied so you get an excellent snapshot of what's going on across various disciplines. Keep up the great work!
I love the interviewers excellent questions and the interviewees well researched answers.
Thank you for the brain material
This deserves to be better. Why is this podcast 320bps? 64 would work just fine. Does anyone there understand the science of audio production?
I listen to a large and growing number of science podcasts and this is definitely one of the good ones. I feel I'm getting a great dose of important science news from a variety of people each week.
This is a good podcast. It's a good overview of science topics. . The podcast also gives a rundown of articles in the current issue of Science Magazine. I'd love to hear a little more detail about those articles. While others have commented on how dry the delivery can be, my only issue is more the audio quality of some of the interviews.
Full of interesting information.
I love the variety of topics and listen to this podcast in my lab. I love this podcast as there isn't much annoying distracting sounds. The science is good, relevant, and the hosts get to the point. Hosts also seem interested in their topics whereas the guys from Nature seem bored half the time.
I love this podcast because you guys, along with "Nature" help me stay updated on new and interesting information!
I read the journal. It's excellent. But it's painful to listen to to editors read scripts in an excruciatingly awkward fashion. I suppose they are trying to dumb down the content but that is not why I listen, I want to hear the undiluted content. I'd recommend the producers listen to the nature podcast, and take notes.
That figure has been debunked a thousand times. Even when you control for full-time workers, women still work fewer hours (due to the definition of full-time being 35 hours), and tend to work in different professions. Accounting for all of these sorts of factors, there's still something around a 4 - 6 cent deficit unexplained, but is certainly not 77% for the "same work". 77%: true. Same work: false. Still 5 stars because I love the show, but that love is conditional on the continued impression that the show is unpolluted with political rhetoric. I just hate to hate to hear false information repeated by smart people, especially in the name of science.
The stories are usually pretty intriguing, and leaves me filled in on the latest science news. Sarah Crespi keeps it entertaining and funny as well!
This podcast presents interesting topics and information in maybe the most boring format imaginable. The conversation between host and guest sounds like computer voices in a QA QA... format. The hosts' response to answers is typically, "interesting" then next question. They could definitely benefit from a producer with experience at startalk radio, stuff you should know, radiolab or similar shows. With a quick glance at the reviews I can see I'm not the only one that feels this way. Hopefully they take these reviews into consideration and change the format in the future because it has all the content in the world and tons of potential, it just needs a better show format.
The delivery isn't perfect but it isn't bad either, I didn't notice it until I read these other peoples' reviews. A podcast worth getting.
This is the most frustrating podcast in the world. I love the content, but the audio becomes impossible to hear in every single episode. I can't tell you how much content I miss because I have to shut it off halfway through every week. Why do they insist on interviewing people over the phone? Sometimes even their own employees are interviewed over the phone. Please please please make an effort to interview people with better microphones, over Skype, Google Hangouts—anything would be better. This audio quality is less than unacceptable—it's unlistenable. They have professional-grade content and programming; but the audio is amateur.
Science mag is doing a good job of getting the latest info out in new formats, and I applaud them for reaching new audiences with this method.
I really, really like this show! The topics it covers are fascinating, and the guests are great. However, every time time the host goes 'Well, that's great for all you sciencey, mathy folks, but why does this matter to normal people like us? How is this practical?' it makes me cringe so hard. Your guests are spending their time listening to a science podcast. Believe me, they understand the concept of pursuing knowledge for its own sake. Stop trying to appeal to some fictional, short-sighted 'common man.' Besides that, the podcast rocks!
As a graduate student in the sciences, I find the Science podcast a good way to keep up on some of the interesting work being published in Science magazine. However, recently I've been having the problem that, when I try to refresh the podcast to download new episodes, it crashes iTunes. This only seems to be occuring with the Science podcast, and none of the others I subscribe to. I have no idea whether this is a problem with Science, Apple, or my own instalation of iTunes, but unfortunately, I'll have to unsubscribe until the issue gets worked out.
It is impossible to listen to this podcast unless in perfect silence with the sound turned all the way up because the sound is horrible!! Please fix this
I don't miss any of the podscat, but I think that it could be improved a lot with a few changes. First, the voice of the broadcaster is quite nice, but she doesn't show any positive or negative emotions to the findings. It could be an amazing finding or a terrible one… and she keeps always the same nice voice. That cannot be. Science findings could it be insensible, but human reactions could be very ample. Second, it would be good to have a brief introduction of the main topics that are going to be presented; one minute would be more than enough. Then you know what is going to come and if you want to continue listening or not. She just present the main topic, but nothing else. Third, the additional news at the end should be a bit longer. The editor presents almost just the titles of the subjects and nothing else. Take at least 30 or 40 seconds with each news, please.
They have changed narrators and the podcasts are much better to listen to. Clarity of English pronunciation matters when you're narrating. The material covered is top notch. Now it isn't painful to listen to anymore.
This podcast has excellent content but the audio quality of the interviews is exceedingly poor. I can hardly make out what the scientist is saying. I sounds like they just recorded them off a poor cellphone connection. Also compared to Nature podcast the presenters are very plain, boring and need to make the delivery more exciting.
Linda Pun's inability to pronounce common words is really distracting. Besides this, great show, keep 'em coming.
I've listened to this podcast for several years. In the past, I've shared many of the technical criticisms of previous reviewers, and been less than satisfied with the scientific quality of the interviews, but I'm pleased to say that this podcast has improved a great deal over the last 6 months. The quality of phone links has improved, overseas interviewees, by chance or selection, are much more easily understood, and the interview approaches and questions have become more organized and professional. I read the journal Science regularly and I find that the current interviews give me useful insight into the motivations and methods of the scienctists/authors. You don't need to be a scientist to enjoy the podcast, just interested in your world and willing to think a bit. The podcast is well worth a listen.
I enjoy all the many science podcasts -- they are enjoyable and each has something to offer. But Sciene Magazine's podcast covers the nitty gritty of science in a way that none of the others do. This is facilitated by excellent interviewers who appear to have done extensive homework before the interviews start. I particularly want to compliment Sarah Crespi -- she is the best science interviewer in my experience, hands down.
The content is great and I enjoy keeping up with developments in science with help of this podcast. However, some of the interviews are recorded over poor quality phone lines, which makes it hard to comprehend. In combination with often hard to understand accents of interviewees, certain segments of podcasts are unlistenable. Enhancement in quality of audio would solve the problem. In addition, this podcasts features one of theist annoying hosts. Several times during every interview story is interrupted by comments like "huh", "hm", "wow!", "ha", "aha" etc. after listening to several podcasts, this unnecessary and unprofessional exclamations start to annoy and ultimately deteriorate further the quality of podcast.