When traveling by air (about every other month), I’ve always picked up a copy of The Economist and a copy of Discover. Last time I traveled the Hudson News didn’t have Discover, so I grabbed a Scientific American instead. I was impressed with the depth of the content (although some of it went over my head). What say you?
I pick them all up from time to time, but the answer is easily Scientific American. I only read the others if an unread SA is not available.
Why did you include Science but not Nature? (Not that I’ve ever seen either one at an airport newsstand.)
My usual pick for in-flight reading is Scientific American. If that isn’t available (or I’ve read the edition already), I’d go for magazines on other topics.
Easiest poll ever.
Scientific American…while the articles about particle physics and computer science are always over my head, I really appreciate the depth of the articles. It takes time to read this magazine; I like that!
Invention and Technology is pretty interesting.
As a SciAm subscriber, this one was easy.
I pretty much only get them during air travel as well. Definitely prefer “Scientific American” over discover. But, be careful. Last time I accidentally bought “Scientific American Mind” instead of the normal version, and it just wasn’t the same. The real bummer is I had to pay import prices.
I’ve never seen Nature anywhere. I assumed that the “Something Else” option would be used frequently. I had no idea that SciAm was so popular.
I subscribe to SciAm and I’m always happy to return home and find the latest issue waiting. As others have said, I enjoy the depth of the content.
It’s rarely what I would call over my head, but it certainly stretches my limits. I think that’s what I enjoy about it. I found it comprehensible, but often only with some effort. But then I’m one of those freaks who likes learning and likes having to work at it and exercise my brain.
Other … Science News
I used to get that when I was a kid. I loved it.
As I recall it came every week. Is that still true?
My favorite general purpose science journal that I read is Nature, which has become easier with the advent of electronic publishing by NPG (and now they even have an iPhone app). Scientific American is okay–the quality of the main articles is generally pretty good, especially since they are typically written by principal investigators in a fashion that is between pop science and peer-reviewed journal submission–but the editorial board clearly has some biases that show up in the selection of articles. They also seem to emphasize more showy science over good research at times; I understand the motivation, but I still find it irritating. I personally can’t stand Discover and Popular Science, as they select very splashy pop sci articles that make headlines but say little or nothing.
Back when I had general access to a technical library, I ready Physical Letters and Physical Review as often as I could (though usually not every week), and there are a couple of technical journals I read on a semi-regular basis for work, but those are obviously not intended for the general public.
Stranger
The extent to which SciAm has succeeded in meeting its goal of informing the intellectually curious lay person has always been debatable. Years ago when the articles were mainly written my scientists who were active researchers in the topic of those articles, you knew that you were getting what I’ll call the “helmet-cam” view of the field. But great scientists aren’t always great writers and you really had to struggle through some of the articles. At first you just felt stupid but upon closer inspection you realized that the writing was flawed - whether contorted, vague, stilted or whatever.
In recent years it seems that they have begun to take positions on certain issues and while not being blatant advocates seem to have identifiable biases. I think that goes along with a general attempt to broaden their appeal - not necessarily a bad thing depending upon how you do it, but I don’t get the feeling that they have the same commitment to the subject matter that they once did.
I think Science News is the best publication for lay people. It comes out weekly and is relatively brief, usually 20-30 pages I would guess, so you don’t get overwhelmed. It has an excellent mix of short articles that cover the latest news and longer articles that go in depth on particular subjects. The writing is almost always clear, informed and articulate (although there always exceptions). And finally, it seems to make a concerted effort to present all relevant aspects of a story. If something looks like a breakthrough but some people in that field aren’t so sure, you will get their viewpoint as well.
I do still love SciAm and wouldn’t even think about dumping my subscription. But to be honest, I don’t think it has ever been the best lay publication. It has some absolutely stellar moments, but for being well informed and getting all relevant viewpoints, well, that has never been what it was shooting for anyway.
Popular Science is my favorite. I do read them all however.
I get Scientific American but I’m preferring American Scientist.
Other.
New Scientist, a British magazine distributed worldwide is by far the best I have read.
I find it interesting and well written.
I find Nature and similar far too detailed and technical for someone who is merely a science enthusiast rather then a proffessional keeping up on peer review.
It is on line if you wish to check it out.
Disclaimer, I’m not nor have ever been associated with the magazine other then as a reader, nor as far as I know have ever actually known anyone who is/was.
I hardly see it in the UK these days, but, like Grey, I prefer Amercan Scientist.
2nd choice would be New Scientist.
I like *Science *because it has actual real science in it, not dumbed down shit like the others (with Popular Science being the most heinously useless, although I found it fun to read in middle school.) Nature is pretty good, but too bio-heavy for my tastes.
Scientific American and Science News. Science News now comes every two weeks, but I also subscribe to their daily email service, which is free. Scientific American has gone down hill since the old days of Martin Gardner and C. L. Stong, but is still excellent.