Science writing resists metaphors because no one seems to a

Science journalists don't think much of science bloggers (1) and they have a good reason, at least given the bulk of blogging.  It is mostly riffs on press releases or making fun of religious people, which is a little thin.  At least when Republicans were in power they could mix up the ridicule a little.

On the other side, bloggers don't think much of anyone in big media unless a job at a big media company is advertised; then the Twittersphere is abuzz with excitement, and the biggest talking heads in the blogosphere don't think much of Science 2.0, because we only write science and do it for free - the kind of thing others claim to do, though they turn a blind eye to blatant ethical breaches when it makes them money until one of them finally takes a stand.   And we make goat noises at the more shrill, militant hysterics who think volume equals quality, which doesn't earn us any friends.

Sometimes you fight trolls, sometimes you find treasure

NOTES:

(1) And PIOs at institutions even less.   Some anonymous public relations intern at FermiLab even went so far as to call Tommaso Dorigo - a renowned experimental physicist - a fame seeking blogger, despite the fact that he does very little blogging and it's mostly about chess or Berlusconi's lovelife when he does.