Notes from the trenches on science communication: what works, what doesn’t and what I’m still trying to figure out.
Communication Breakdown's Latest Posts
Journalism – including science journalism – has a long way to go in terms of increasing diversity. A 2013 article in Columbia Journalism Review reported that minorities make up less than 12.5 percent of newsroom staff – and only around 10 percent of newsroom supervisors. Earlier this year, I learned about the Journalism Diversity Project (JDP), which aims to boost newsroom diversity. To learn more about the project, I reached out to Emma Carew Grovum, one of the co-founders […]
MIT’s Knight Science Journalism program (KSJ) announced April 13 that it will be providing financial support to the non-profit website The Open Notebook (TON). KSJ will give TON $60,000 under a one-year pilot agreement to support the site’s mission of helping science journalists sharpen their skills. TON is a great resource for science reporters, and science writers generally, so I reached out to TON co-founder Siri Carpenter to learn more about the agreement and what KSJ’s […]
Good reporters strive to write balanced stories, presenting all sides of a story in as unbiased a way as possible. But this can be controversial in science reporting if the overwhelming body of evidence suggests that one viewpoint is, well, wrong. For example, some people believe that global climate change is a hoax and that vaccines do more harm than good. But the vast majority of scientific evidence tells us that climate change is real and that vaccines offer enormous... Read more
Someone recently asked me how I evaluate whether science- or health-related news stories are inaccurate, misleading, or otherwise full of nonsense. I hadn’t really organized my thoughts on this before. But I had read some pretty good tips from other science writers – including one by Michelle Nijhuis at Slate and one by Emily Willingham at Forbes.com. And I’ve also been reading the news with a more critical eye recently, since I started reviewing health stories for Health News […]
On March 18, the U.S. National Science Foundation announced the steps it will take to make federally-funded research publicly available. I had some questions regarding what this might mean for publishing companies and peer-reviewed journals. I reached out to some of the largest publishers of scholarly journals, and representatives from three of the publishers responded. The answers ranged from certainty that NSF’s plan would be easily implemented to uncertainty about what the plan would […]
Log in to leave a comment