Use the Media for Your Message

You and Your Friendly Science Journalist Have a Lot in Common. You have to take pity on journalists. Only politicians and lawyers are more universally despised. Scientists in particular have long avoided the press, for reasons that have ranged from an admirable reluctance to toot their own horns, to a less-admirable fondness for stereotyping. "Reporters always get things wrong,"scientists mutter."They take information out of context, they sensationalize our results, and they make us look like fools." And then scientists scratch their heads and wonder why the public is scientifically illiterate— and why, when they dip expectantly into the public coffers, they sometimes come up empty-handed. In fact, what many scientists may not realize is that science journalists by and large are conscientious specialists who genuinely love their chosen subject. Unlike the paparazzi who hover around celebrities waiting for the latest bit of succulent if embarrassing gossip, science journalists are more interested in expanding and defining the body of human knowledge— which presumably is the motivation that drives scientists. Consider this: when you have an exciting and important result that you think is worth sharing with your peers, the chances are good that non-scientists will want to hear about it as well. And the most effective way to disseminate your message to the largest possible audience is through the media. There are many ways to reach out to the media, from an informal telephone call to a semi-formal press release to a full-blown media event."All you must do to begin a productive dialogue is familiarize yourself with the journalist’s requirements, and keep in mind that a good working relationship between scientists and journalists is founded on interdependency. Journalists need scientists for story ideas and material. And, yes, you just might need journalists to yank you from a scientist’s natural tendency toward professional autism, to lend your work broader significance. Remember that scientific discoveries don’t belong to scientists alone; they are the heritage of us all." Herewith, a few ideas about how to communicate effectively and happily with journalists. Get to know your public affairs department. The most straightforward link between research scien- tists and the media begins at the university public affairs office, yet too often scientists neglect to exploit the local resources. Many university public affairs departments are staffed by press officers who were trained in journalism and thus are reasonably savvy about the media. They can be depended on to write lively press releases and do the leg and telephone-work that you may not have time for. If you’re publishing a report that you feel deserves attention, the public affairs office may be able to organize a press conference or luncheon, or at least prepare a news release. Indeed, in many cases you’d do better to leave the arrangements to the public affairs department. Otherwise, you risk sounding like a self-promoter, and if there’s one thing that joumalists are suspicious of, it’s an outsized ego. However, you shouldn’t absolve yourself of all responsibility. Don’t sit around and wait for the public affairs office to discover you. Talk to the people there and get to know one you can trust. Keep that person informed of the course of your investigations, when you expect results, any upcoming publication dates, and so forth. Even work-in-progress can make an interesting story. The best university PA officers spend two or three weeks each year visiting journalists around the country, suggesting story ideas and helping reporters to shape and focus stories they already have in mind. Obviously, press officers can present your work as newsworthy only if they are aware of what you're doing. But before you race to the phone to trumpet the triumphs of your lab, take a moment out for some serious self-appraisal. Which brings us to our second point. Be realistic about what you have to offer. Not every twitch and tremble in science merits a two-column spread on the front page of the New York Times. Reporters particularly those at major news organizations—are bombarded with letters and phone calls from basement tinkerers and kooks seeking publicity for electronic jelly jars or channeling devices tuned to King Henry VIII’s bedroom. The worst thing that either you or a represen tative of the public affairs office can do is to waste currency with journalists on trivial or pointless story suggestions. Make sure that your tale really is worth telling. Defining a good story is by no means easy, but it can be done. A reliable rule-of-thumb is that the work has resonance: it has significance beyond the immediate result. Consider the recent example from a laboratory at the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research, an affiliate of MIT. Robert Weinberg’s lab, in collaboration with Thaddeus Dryja of Massachusetts Eye, and Ear Hospital, cloned a gene that is believed to stem the growth of retinoblastoma, a type of eye cancer in young children. Molecular biologists had long been striving to isolate the so-called retinoblastoma gene, not simply because it was involved in a gruesome some childhood disease, but because it was known to be a member of a class of genes that are negative regulators of cell growth. The retinoblastoma gene was the first of this class to be isolated, and thus ranks as a major scientific achievement beyond its implications for the disease itself. Before publication of the report in Nature, the Whitehead Institute public affairs office arranged a small press conference, inviting reporters from the Boston Globe, the New York Times and Time magazine. A press kit was prepared and the principal scientists responsible for the work gave brief presentations. There was no doubt in the minds of either the speakers or the reporters that the media event was just that. The scientists had a story worth telling, and the journalists responded by giving the report substantial play. Not every story need be a "breakthrough" in order to interest the press, however. In general, reporters prefer stories with a medical, technological or practical angle to those that concern pure research. If there is any way that you can relate your work to a topic of general lay interest you’ll have an easier time convincing a reporter (and the reporter’s editor) that the story should be aired. Incidentally, there’s no harm in thinking about the potential spinoffs of your work, however far removed you are from applied research. If nothing such considerations can give you a fresh perspective on the problem under investigation. Journalists also are drawn to the quirky and the oflbeat. The lab of one of us (T.E.) recently reported in Science on an investigation of insects that are able to feed on latex-producing milkweed plants. The insects cut the leaf veins and allow the latex to drain away before they settle in for a meal. Our results apparently struck some sort of peculiar chord. Although the discovery was hardly earth-shattering, we were bombarded by attention from the press—so much so that we were caught off-guard. Which leads nicely to the next point. Do your homework and be prepared. Your work doesn’t end once you’ve conveyed the essence of your research to the public affairs office. You. should oversee the development of a media event every step of the way. Read an early version of the press release; don’t wait until the eleventh hour to make suggested changes. Better still, take the time to write a rough version yourself. After all, you know the material best, and you have at your fingertips the anecdotal and historical information that can bring a press release alive. If you’re planning to hold a press conference, you’ll probably want to help prepare a press packet. Only with an effective press packet can you guarantee that all the effort that went into the conference will result in published stories. Journalists generally work on very tight deadlines, and they greatly appreciate having as much information as possible in one place. A good press packet need not be slick or seductive—you’re not General Motors, and a scientific discovery is not a new car—but, according to many journalists, it should include the following elements: "A one-page press release that clearly and forcefully describes the news peg what you have done or are planning to do, and why anyone should care. "A lengthier description of the work, with background information and technical explanations and diagrams where appropriate. This second press release should run about five or six pages and should ground the reporter in the basics of the subject. "Brief biographies of the principal scientists responsible for the work. "Photocopies of any popular articles that have been written on the subject. Press packets should be prepared in advance and sent to reporters ahead of time. Make sure, however, that you have enough extra packets to distribute during the conference proper. It’s also up to you to decide who the speakers will be. Conference participants should be vivid public speakers as well as superlative scientists. Journalists need good quotes, and if deprived of lively interjections to break up their text, they might well neglect the story no matter how inherently rich the content. Needless to say, the more important the news that you’re announcing, the weightier your responsibility as event impresario. Here an example may serve to illustrate the painstaking preparations that are necessary to orchestrate a successful affair on a grand scale. The, international conference on the topic of nuclear winter, held in 1983, was an “event” that lived up to the term. Not the least reason. fur this was that the organizers-Carl Sagan and Paul Ehrlich, among many other--systematically prepared for it a full year in advance. One group planned a five-day technical pre-conference, hosted by the prestigious American Academy of Arts and Sciences and carried out without publicity. At this meeting, some of the ideas that would later be presented more fully at the formal conference were hammered out. The pre-conference led to the preparation of two major papers on nuclear winter, for eventual publication as lead articles in Science. Preprints of the papers were distributed to selected individuals well in advance of the conference. On the week of the conference Parade magazine, with its readership of 50 million, published an ar- ticle on nuclear winter by Carl Sagan. By the time the conference was held in Washington, D.C. the air of excitement and anticipation was palpable. No effort was spared to spread the word. A short video-tape had been commissioned, depicting graphically, in a matched dissolved sequence, the predicted consequences of nuclear winter. Journalists had been individually contacted before the conference and were asked to attend. Press release after press release was mailed out. A live exchange was arranged between American and Soviet scientists over video satellite. To the immense satisfaction of everyone involved, the conference came off with real pizzazz. The ABC show "Nightline" aired a program during the event, pitting conference participants against such opponents of the nuclear winter idea as Edward Teller and Pentagon official Richard Burt. Virtually every newspaper, magazine and television station covered the conference to some extent. A colossal amount of work had gone into the whole affair, but because the conference organizers were deeply committed to educating both the scientific community and the public about nuclear winter, none be- grudged the hours expended finessing the details and courting the press. The success of the nuclear winter conference brings to mind two other points. First is the matter of commitment. If you believe in a story, you will be able to convince others of its importance. Promoting an issue or a discovery does not require hard work because in a very real sense a vital story sells itself. Finally, scientists who want to establish long-term, fruitful relations with the press should cultivate friendships with reporters. It’s one thing to rely on the public affairs office to organize a single event or to help write a press release. It’s quite another to develop a network of media contacts you can turn to again and again without the need for an intermediary. Such relationships can only be built over time, by working closely with journalists you trust and who have learned to trust you. When a reporter knows that you’re not trynig to promote yourself, that your story suggestions are sound, and that you’ve come through in the past, you’ll have no trouble finding a ready ear the next time around. And don’t be surprised when those journalists start calling you with the plea, "Anything new? I’m desperate for a good story." Angier is a freelance writer and editor. Eisner is Schurman Professor of Biology Mudd Hall, Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853-2702.

Use the Media for Your Message

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of