On Madison Avenue, the motto is:
"The sizzle sells the steak."
That highlights the best and the worst of the business.
Many people despise the advertising business because it
is often unscrupulous. Artificial sizzle can be used to
trick people into buying a rotten or nonexistent steak.
That is, however, not the whole story. We need to
look at all four possibilities:
good unwholesome
product product
----------- -----------
sizzle: A C
no sizzle: B D
Sometimes people recoil in horror from the deceptive,
nefarious scenario "C" and adopt the diametrically
opposite policy, insisting on all steak and no sizzle.
I say that's a mistake. Rather than a diagonal move
from "C" to "B", the smart move is horizontal, from "C"
to "A". Start with a nice juicy tasty nutritious steak
and then make it sizzle.
As an example:
"Gauss' writing style was terse, polished, and devoid of
motivation. Abel said, `He is like the fox, who effaces
his tracks in the sand with his tail'. Gauss, in defense
of his style, said, `no self-respecting architect leaves
the scaffolding in place after completing the building'."
Quoted from: http://users.wfu.edu/kuz/Stamps/Gauss/Gauss.html
I say Gauss's policy is not good PR, and not good pedagogy.
I mention this because in recent days we have been discussing
two things in parallel:
1) "This is what science looks like. This is what
we know, and this is how we know it."
2) "This is a 2x4. Whaaaack!!! OK, now that I've
got your attention....."
These are both worthwhile things to discuss. They are not
the same thing ... but they are not mutually exclusive.
============
As an example of what I'm talking about:
It is unnecessarily unflattering (to teacher and to student
alike) to speak of whacking people with a 2x4. Terms like
"glitz" and "spin" are less extreme, but still unflattering.
I recommend something more positive, such as "sizzle" or
"attractive packaging".
This example is self-referential, insofar as it puts
a more attractive spin on "spin".
Let's be clear: It is a good practice to use flashy demos,
videos, jokes, et cetera to get people interested in a topic
at the beginning. On the other hand, as is so often the case,
where you start is not where you want to end up. The students
still need to read the scientific primary sources, do the lab
work, do the thinking, do the writing, and do the real-world
practical applications.
In other words: The steak is still super-important. The
sizzle sells the steak, but does not substitute for the steak.
PR and science are wildly different, but if we do things
right, PR is not the enemy of science.