The place of science journalism in science literacy

by Kara Rogers

If you had $1 to spend on improving science literacy in America, how would you spend it? That was the question posed by Rick Borchelt, an organizer of today's Civics of science session, to panelists Carolyn L. Funk, Jon Miller, and Chris Mooney.

Miller proposed spending half his dollar on improving pre-college science education, with the remainder on adult learning, a small portion of which would be used for science journalism. Mooney suggested spending the whole dollar on creating jobs for science journalists and young scientists, building an army of people devoted to improving public science literacy. And Funk said most of her dollar would go into the education system, with spending divided on efforts to incorporate science standards into elementary and lower-level education and on adult learning and informal adult education, the area where mainstream science journalism has its greatest impact.

Although the session raised more questions than it provided answers, the Agronsky & Co. style discussion, as promised, led to some interesting debate about the place of science journalism in science literacy and education in the United States. Science journalism is concerned mainly with delivering information about the latest developments in scientific discovery, and today most science reporting operates within the "just-in-time" model of new media. The cultural importance of science, the future of which could hinge on fitting into the new media scene, was perhaps most entertainingly discussed within the context of music and Rock Stars, a topic introduced by Mooney. Whether science and science journalism would benefit from riding the coat-tails of mass media remains to be seen.

The state of science literacy in America was addressed in data cited by several panelists. Data presented by Miller seemed to suggest that younger Americans, namely those belonging to Generation X, are more science literate than older Americans. Also according to Miller, in a study of science literacy in 34 countries, the United States ranked second best (behind Sweden), with roughly one-quarter of Americans considered science literate.

Of course, measuring science literacy is itself a matter of debate. As Funk pointed out, determining science literacy involves measuring multiple dimensions of scientific understanding. Several of these measures, such as textbook versus practical scientific knowledge, need to be reevaluated. Other measures of science literacy discussed by Funk included conceptual and factual understanding, knowledge of scientific processes, and ability to distinguish between science and pseudoscience.

Pseudoscience is particularly threatening to responsible scientific reporting. People look for scientific information when they need it, and from today's session, it is clear that among the many challenges facing science literacy is the plethora of information, trustworthy and untrustworthy, on the Internet.

PIOs on being an effective PIO

More on this morning's session, "How to be an effective science PIO in the changing media world." This time, we hear about PIOs on the panel.

by Renee Twombly

It was clear from the PIOs on the panel that the hundreds of emails that Don and Ivan are ritually rejecting en masse every day from did not come from them. In fact, Don and Ivan - and the media in general - may be increasingly superfluous to the job these PIOs see themselves doing.

Earle Holland, for one, puts the media third down on his list of whom PIOs should pay homage to. The first two are the public and science (in general?), and the fourth is the institution that the PIO works for – Ohio State in Earle’s case. Earle called himself the dinosaur on the panel not only because he has been at Ohio State for 32 years, but because he believes that telling good stories about science is the goal of a PIO – which makes science writing the news media’s peer. Earle said his is not a “pitch shop” in that it is “very, very rare” for them to pitch a story to anybody. In fact, he says, their news releases are not strategically sent out but rather “thrown to the wind”…

Steve Cole, a public affairs specialist for NASA, spends an increasing amount of his time reaching the public directly. He tweets twice daily on NASA’s Twitter feed, which has 600,000 followers, he produces “visuals,” and he has narrated videos for NASA TV, which are available on cable and YouTube. The new expectation at NASA is that their PIOs are the media, Steve said.

Joe Bonner, from Rockefeller, has a bit of a tougher job, perhaps, than Steve: “We cure a lot of diseases in mice,” he told the overflow crowd. Because of that, he makes a point of establishing a relationship with the science media (and beaucoup others) through extensive use of social media. His tools include Twitter, Facebook, and Linked In, of course, but also Google Reader and RSS to exchange info and learn from others. He communicates with Ivan but through Twitter.

Online communities – it pays to be involved

As science journalism moves increasingly to the Web, the work often just begins with writing and posting an article. The commentary from readers that follows a post needs focused and immediate attention, especially early in a site’s development. That was the consensus that developed during the discussion at this morning’s ‘Social web and online commenting’ session.

Tools such as site registration can halt detractors from the conversation before they ever get started and help weed out the spammers and trolls – the commenters who fill their posts with insults and other types of harassment. But, says Teresa Hayden, community manager for BoingBoing, “Great conversations require real human beings.” Hayden’s pedigree in social media stretches back to the 1980s.

Near-real-time comments from insightful readers add a dimension to science blogs and online articles that isn’t possible in print media. To develop that value in your web site, Hayden says, find ways to motivate the best commenters.

Mathilde Piard points to a badge system used by the Huffington Post. Thoughtful contributors who frequently post about, say, foreign policy might be rewarded with a ‘Foreign Policy’ badge that indicates their elevated standing in the community. Piard is the social media manager at Cox Media Group Digital.

By the same token, sussing out the system’s abusers is also critical. Just as comments that drive the conversation add to a site’s perceived value, spammers and trolls can degrade a site’s image in a hurry, discouraging value-adding contributors from posting. Amos Zeeberg, managing editor for Discover Online, says that catching a nefarious comment early on can halt an ugly turn in the discussion.

As a site develops a following, the panelists agree, the community will begin to police itself, as contributors become stakeholders in generating thought-provoking discussions.

How to stand out in a crowd: advice for PIOs from journalists

By Anne Frances Johnson

“I don’t do ‘Happy Birthday, dear disease' stories.” That’s how Don McNeil, Jr. of the New York Times opened “How to be an effective science PIO in the changing media world.” It was standing room only as three PIOs and two journalists swapped advice at the session.

“News tips” on diseases of the month just aren’t what journalists want, McNeil explained. What do they want? “New ideas, unusual angles, and human stories,” said McNeil.

With a directness and humor that prompted one audience member to ask, “Where were you during last night’s Science Cabaret?” McNeil offered PIOs tips. If you’re pitching a diarrhea story, get a fresh angle on diarrhea. Don’t pretend to have the cure for AIDS unless you really do. And if you have a story with an engaging personal angle or something that trumps conventional wisdom, all the better.

Ivan Oransky of Reuters Health followed that with some do’s and don’ts. First, figure out what’s of interest to a journalist or publication. Use that to decide which stories to pitch to whom. And don’t follow an emailed press release with a phone call. Also, convince your researchers not to talk in jargon, and tell them to return journalists’ calls by deadline.

It’s about trust, trust, trust. Don’t embargo studies that are already published. Don’t ask some journalists to agree to an embargo that you let someone else break. And establish a relationship with a journalist before sending embargoed stuff—otherwise, they’ll have no obligation to uphold it. See Embargo Watch for more on tricky embargo situations.

Finally, send stuff of interest even if it isn’t from you institution—it goes a long way toward building trust.

Stay tuned for a post from Renee Twombly about what the PIOs had to say at the session.

Profitable freelancing: Starting a business and keeping it productive

By Allison MacLachlan and Sara LaJeunesse

How can I find new assignments? How should I organize my time? Can I earn enough money to make freelancing a worthwhile career choice?

These are some of the questions we had when we settled in with our cups of coffee to hear freelance writers Amber Dance, Christopher Mims, John Pavlus, and Jeffrey Perkel talk about their experiences establishing and sustaining freelance businesses with maximal efficiency and minimal fuss.

Amber spoke about the analog office and gave tips on: setting goals, tracking financial success, selectively choosing jobs and clients, thinking of time as money, negotiating contracts, and managing multiple projects. “It’s all on you,” she said, noting that she sets goals annually and then regularly evaluates how she is meeting those goals. Amber tracks her projects on a physical bulletin board with projects listed on index cards and tacked under the categories: ideas, pitched, in progress, with editor, waiting for publication, and waiting for pay.

Amber also suggests spending a month timing everything you do, including brainstorming, researching, emailing, traveling, interviewing, writing, editing, and invoicing. “Figure out what an hour of your time is really worth,” she said.

Jeffrey spoke about the digital office, particularly how to run a business on the cheap with a laptop, smart phone, and wireless Internet. “To be productive you need to be flexible,” he said. “You need to be able to work wherever you happen to be.”

He suggests using several digital applications, such as communication software (Skype), to-do list manager (Remember the Milk), back-up program (CrashPlan), time-tracking program (Harvest), note-capturing tool (Evernote, Instapaper), file-saving software (Dropbox), and organizational software (Mac Freelance).

Jeffrey suggests maintaining an online identity by registering a domain name (register.com), establishing a Web site/blog, getting a vanity email address (you@yourname.com), and getting active on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.

John spoke about the "mental office," and gave examples of what he calls "mind hacks" that can help make freelance writing more productive. He emphasized the importance of owning your attention while at work. To mimic punching in on a time clock, he uses Harvest, a Mac widget that helps you track your tasks and how much time you spent on them.

Freelancers are employees, but are also their own managers. John advised against over-organizing and micro-managing, using his kitchen drawer as an example. Instead of overdoing it with systems and methods, he suggested a simple focus on what big-picture results you want to achieve in a work day.

Finally, John spoke about how to be a good boss. "Give yourself whatever you need to do your best work," he said, adding that this includes gadgets for an enjoyable work environment as well as a forgiving attitude.

Christopher, the final speaker, presented the results of the NASW's Freelance Science Writer Survey. According to the results, 65 percent of freelancers surveyed are female, while 33 percent are male. Most are in the 31-40 age bracket. Christopher joked that annual income spans the range from $5,000 to over $100,000, with no observable correlation to hours of work clocked. He noted that unfortunately, there is still a significant difference between how much men and women make in the freelance business.

According to the survey results, freelancers are homebodies: 91 percent have a home office, and 85 percent say they never work outside the home, like in a coffee shop. Coincidentally, those who do work in coffee shops tend to make less per year, a regrettable trend Christopher dubs the "latte penalty."

Christopher concluded by sharing some productivity tips. He advises turning off social media once in awhile, closing e-mail, and using the old-fashioned kitchen timer for bursts of good work.

What's New is Old, What's Old is New

David Berreby here, another of the NASW traveling fellows, and a first-time attendee. I'm the author of Us and Them: The Science of Identity and I write the "Mind Matters" blog at Bigthink.com. Since the late 1980's, I've written about science (mostly as it relates to human behavior) for magazines and newspapers (including The New Yorker, The New York Times Magazine, Nature, The New Republic, Smithsonian, Discover, among many others).

Like all of us I've been trying to adapt to the financial and technological disruptions that are changing our craft. In the past decade I've learned to blog and tweet and Facebook and digg and stumble upon. Yet I've been struck at how, despite all the innovations, it's still "old media" that sets the terms for my work. Firstly, because only magazine-style contracts can pay the bills for a freelance writer. And secondly, because even in the blogosphere and twitterverse, Old Media credentials determine the pecking order of credentials and prestige. And it's those pecking orders that readers use to apportion their attention. (Much as I love to imagine that people read my blog posts and judge them on their own merits, I know that readers still value the seal of approval that's conferred by association with a magazine they have heard of, or a book review they recall reading.)

In short, we're in an era of new content but we're still thinking in terms of the familiar old containers. History suggests this effect could linger for a long time (even after a century of internal combustion for example, we still rate vehicles according to their "horsepower.")

There's a lot about "new media" that I like: The ability to correct a mistake or improve a phrase after "publication"; the honesty of a byline over sentences direct from me, unadulterated by other people's thoughts and quibbles; learning what "the public" wants from the public itself, rather than from an editor's guesses about that public. But "new media" can't support a sustained writing project financially. Then too, we're told, "the web" wants quick, glib, always-updating "content," which is the opposite of thoughtful journalism about science. So, like many of us, I'm trying to think my way through my own ambivalence as well the ambiguous state of our business.

I'm sure I'm not alone in feeling that I live in a no-writer's-land between two realms -- one supposedly dying, the other not yet born. It's because I feel this way that I'm looking forward to today's session on "experiments in new media." I want to hear about those "beautiful failures and startling successes." God (or evolution, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster) knows, we need all the ideas we can get.

I'll be blogging here about that session after it ends (I was about to write "during the session" but, um, no -- it's a discussion, not a pie-eating contest). Stay tuned.

A recipe for networking

I spent my first professional conference hoping no one would notice how nervous I was. I fidgeted in my new “professional” clothes and fiddled with my flimsy business cards. I was a college junior, new to the world of science writing, and I felt like an imposter. While I’ve since accepted that I may never learn to walk in high-heels, arriving at the 2010 NASW conference, I am comfortable. I know how to network.

Preparation is the first step for good networking. Go through the speakers list and learn some names. If, say, the editor of Scientific American (Mariette DiChristina!) looks interesting, make sure to actually read some Scientific American.

Once at the meeting, focus on attitude. I always try to be friendly—smiles and handshakes for everyone! The late bird doesn’t get the worm, and the wallflower doesn’t get any business cards. Speaking of business cards, don’t be stingy. I recently got a job after a journal editor looked at my card and realized she needed a freelancer. It’s also smart to have resumes and clips on hand.

Now the awkward part: what to talk about? It’s tempting to beg for a job. Please, pretty please. Don’t do that. Mention that you would love to get more experience through a job or internship. Ask if they’re hiring, but be realistic. Jobs are rare these days, and an employer probably gets approached by a lot of bright-eyed college students like myself. You shouldn’t just look for work—you should try to learn from the professionals. Ask for advice about getting into the business. How does a writer come up with topics? How does an editor decide what gets published?

Finally, a brief story about first impressions:

Last year, I was shopping with my uncle, a true trend-watcher, when he grabbed my hand. He inspected my scraggly nails and chipped pink nail polish and shook his head. “Just because it’s journalism doesn’t mean your nails have to look like that,” he said. Apparently, writers have a reputation for looking sloppy. Despite our disheveled stereotype, professional attire plays a big part making a good impression. Just because I’m a college student doesn’t mean I have to look like one.

This year I’m ready. I’m excited to hand out my cards and meet some of my favorite writers. Now I just have to worry about looking like a weather-wimp as I shiver through this New England weekend.