Is there any scientist science communicators that this criticism wouldn't apply to?
As far as criticism goes, I appreciate how professionally you stated this PSA. Most don't make the same points as gracefully. Best of luck with your studies.
Neil deGrasse Tyson; if he is working on a s riot prepared by someone else like on a TV Show, he is quite a nice communicator. But, if he does not have such a script, I would say unless he is debunking a flat earther or some actor’s mythical views of mathematics, I would just ignore it. If he talks about biology, which he often does, I would just leave.
He comments on fields in which he’s unqualified, and his remake of Nova had a ton of unnecessary swearing. And goes on TV and talks about politics. That’s when he lost me.
Sagan was political, more so than Tyson. Sometimes science intersects with politics in ways that can’t be avoided. Nuclear proliferation, land management, etc. So how can you just turn off any scientist who touches politics? Or is it just a certain kind of politics that turns you off?
Sagan always felt respectful, while Tyson feels like he’s looking down on everyone around him. Some of his hosts have also said he’s a huge jerk. I think he would be a very bad role model for the field.
As far as criticism goes, I appreciate how professionally you stated this PSA. Most don't make the same points as gracefully. Best of luck with your studies.