-
Asked by bebebleu to Angus, Christian, Hannah, Laura, Simon on 24 Jun 2013.
Question: How strong is the relationship between media and science? Does the media analayse your data correctly? Is your work publicised correctly?
- Keywords:
-
Angus Ferraro answered on 24 Jun 2013:
My work hasn’t had too much media attention so far, but I can comment in general. The issue with the media is that they usually decide what kind of story they want to tell before they talk to you. There’s usually no way of stopping this. The best we can do is to keep them as honest as possible! Some journalists are better than others.
Usually the media coverage of science is too simplistic. I often get questions about what’s causing a certain type of weather, but the truth is weather has many, many causes and it’s difficult to say!
-
Laura Roberts Artal answered on 24 Jun 2013:
Like Angus, my work hasn’t attracted media attention, but I went on a course to learn all about the relationship between science and media only a few weeks ago. It really opened my eyes at to how great it can be, but also how badly it can go too!
I didn’t realise how tough a job science journalist had and it’s no wonder that the coverage a finding gets, isnt always how the scientist would like it to be. Did you know that on average a science journalist has to write three or four 750 word science stories in a day, which in most cases they have to research from scratch? The worst part is that they often don’t get published, or they might get heavily changed by the editor?
On the other hand, journalist and editors want their newspapers and websites to be read and sell well, so they are happy to change the headline to make them more catchy, even if they don’t really relate to the story. They will often also try and put what they call a ’emotional twist’ on your research so that people can relate to it easily.I’d say, overall, it is a difficult relationship!!
-
Simon Holyoake answered on 24 Jun 2013:
I consider myself quite lucky that I don’t have to get involved with the media in my job!
Like the others say, it can often be like walking on eggshells at times as any mistakes or statements which are open to interpretation will almost always be interpreted wrongly and make you look bad, especially when scientists work in the public sector (like me) and are therefore funded by taxpayers and expected to justify their existence!
I think it’s very hard to be a scientist under media scrutiny these days, and one of the very important things about ‘I’m a scientist’ in my opinion is that we’re attempting to change attitudes towards science and help the next generation become more scientifically literate!
-
Hannah Bentham answered on 24 Jun 2013:
Generally I would say it’s a good relationship. If we have some good research, we ring them up, send them the info and it gets in pretty quick.
I think scientists have to remember that journalists speak to a different audience than we normally do. They need a story and Joe Blogs needs to stay interested throughout the piece. So if there are some facts that not quite right then in most cases it might be better to accept it and be thankful that non-scientists do take an interest in science.
I recorded a podcast recently for Planet Earth and some of the facts that were used in the introduction were wrong. But the message is still the same.
-
Christian Maerz answered on 25 Jun 2013:
Good question! I have made a number of experiences where my work was misinterpreted in newspapers or on the internet. Journalists simply have this instinct of trying to make things super simple and super catchy, but don’t always pay attention to the necessary detail. It really is an art to properly communicate our complex science to journalists, and to the wider public! And for science journalists, it is very hard to keep track of all the new and exciting science happening – they need to make a story catchy to get it published. So, difficult partnership between science and the media.
Comments