Science Communication:

Scientists and Journalists

Harry Surjadi
Society of Indonesian Science
Journalists
Email: hsurjadi@yahoo.com
Cell Phone: +62811150232
Twitter: @hsurjadi
Blog: harrysurjadi.wordpress.com
Scientists - Science Communication
• “Science isn’t finished until it’s communicated. The
communication to wider audiences is part of the job
of being a scientist, and so how you communicate is
absolutely vital” - Sir Mark Walport (UK chief
scientist)
• Science communication is part of a scientist’s
everyday life
• Important: science knowledge permits the public to
make effective decisions about science policy
• Many personal decisions would be helped by some
understanding of the underlying science
 Important for Scientists
• Scientists are obliged to inform audiences about
what they are doing – “it’s they duty to do so” (Royal
Society, 1985)
• Science comms should be able to facilitate a
scientist’s engagement with industry, government,
other scientists and the community
• To attract funding for research: (unfortunately) the
danger is funds will go to the most effective
communicators than to the most excellent
researchers
 Scientists see Journalists as:
Scientists see journalists as:
-Insufficiently concerned with accuracy
-Superficial
-Sensationalists
-Focused on controversy and tention
-Ignorant
-Unethical and willing to do anything to get the story
-Problem of “journalistic objectivity” – both sides of
the story
 Journalists see scientists as:
-Boring
-Hair-splitting
-Caveating things to death
-Overly interested in process
-Unable to articulate a bottom line of
distinguish the forest for the trees
-Users of unintelligible jargon
 Scientists and Journalists: lot alike
-Curious
-Want to find things out
-Want to share the information with others
-Want do it first
-Analytical
-Of every new finding or report we ask: what does
this mean, what are its implication
-Critical of our own work and work of others
-Highly motivated, persistent, overachieving,
independent thinkers who challenge authority
 Differences: Journalists - Scienctists
-Science journalists are not advocates for research
-Scientists look at things in depth and focus on details –
journalists look for a quick overview
-For journalists details aren’t just a nuisance, they can positively
interfere with journalists’ telling a coherent story
-Differ markedly in where they draw the line between crucial
details and needless clutter
-Scientists are rational, journalists are looking for the emotional
human element – the frustations and joys of the research
-Journalists take this approach to a story not just because it is
relatively uncomplicated and easy to tell, but because it is
appealing to readers, viewers, or listeners
 Differences: Journalists - Scienctists
Telling stories differently:
-Scientists go from evidence to conclution
-Journalists report the conclution first then put in
as much detail as they have room for
-Often leaving out facts the scientists think are
crucial

MANY SCIENTISTS HAVE SO MUCH TROUBLE WITH

SO MANY JOURNALISTS – lack of preparation on
both side
 Understanding Journalists-Media
• Science journalism: 80% good journalism +
20% to learn and communicate
• News values: new, human interest,
kontroversial, tren, konflik, drama, impact,
proximity, seks
• News hook or news peg
• Code of Ethics: 1) seek truth and report it; 2)
minimize harm; 3) act independently; 4) be
accountable and transparent
 How to pitch to science journalists
• Identify and show news value(s) and news peg
• Show the story
• Google the reporter/media
• Figure out the main point you want to convey or two main points or
(max) three main points
• Figure out how to make these points in the clearest, simplest
language – the most important finding
• Prepare the message (a message is not a fact, a message is a point of
view)
• Message is bigger than a fact (facts – like statistics – prop up the
message)
• Use relevant analogies or apt metaphors to help reporter understand
– to audience too
• Bridging, flagging and repetition
 How to pitch to science journalists
• Remember journalist is not your friend – don’t reply
as you might to a friend or colleague
• For journalist, talking to you is a business activity
• Don’t take anything personally
• Don’t get angry
• Don’t be impatient with questions you think are stupid
• Remember that the journalist cannot possibly have
the knowledge you have
• Sound bite: quotes that sum things up in away that an
ordinary person will understand, accurate, pithy,
understandable, and engaging
 References
• Dean, Cornelia. 2009. Am I Making Myself Clear? : A Scientist’s
Guide to Talking to the Public. Cambridge: Harvard University Press
• Bennett, J.D. and Jennings, R.C. 2011. Successful Science
Communication: Telling It Like It Is. New York: Cambridge University
Press
• Bauer, M.W. and Bucchi, Massimiano. 2008. Journalism, Science and
Society: Science Communication Between News and Public
Relations. New York: Routledge
• Cheng, Donghong; Claessens, Michel; Gascoigne, Toss; Metcalfe,
Jenni; Schiele, Bernard; Shi, Shunke. 2008. Communicating Science
in Social Context: New Model, New Practices. Springer
• Treise, Debbie and Wigold, F. Michael. 2002. Advancing Science
Communication: A Survey of Science Communicators. Science
Communication, Vol. 23 No.3, March 2002, p 310-322
Paul Knoepfler
Q&A
 Terima Kasih
Harry Surjadi
Society of Indonesian Science Journalists
Email: hsurjadi@yahoo.com
Cell Phone: +62811150232
Twitter: @hsurjadi
Blog: harrysurjadi.wordpress.com