Scientists, policymakers, FDA officials, industry spokespersons–talk to my science journalism students! Yes, they haven’t received their masters degrees yet from New York University’s Science, Health and Environmental Reporting Program (SHERP); and yes, most of them are newbies to the profession. But you shouldn’t ignore their emails or make them send reminder messages two or three times before you respond–and then tell them to just read your latest paper or report because you don’t have time to talk to them on the telephone. You won’t be doing them a favor, because after much effort and frustration they will eventually find someone else to talk to; you will be doing yourself a favor, because they are the future of science journalism. By helping them you will be helping yourselves get the word out about what you are doing.
I teach SHERP’s beginning writing and reporting class each fall. Every year, during the first week of September, I look out at 15 bright and eager faces, young people who have made big decisions in their lives to give up careers in research or related fields and plunk down enormous amounts of money to go through our program. They don’t even squirm when I throw them into the deep end of the pool and tell them they have to file their first news stories in just two weeks. But then the inevitable happens:
“My sources aren’t getting back to me.”
“How long should I wait until I email a source again?”
“I’ve sent out 11 emails and nobody has gotten back, should I send out more emails?”
I don’t want to exaggerate or be one-sided about this. Many scientists are terrific about responding to student queries, patiently taking the time to walk them through their latest research (in that first assignment, my students have to write about a new journal paper.) This is especially true when the rest of the news media has shown little or no interest in their work; they are often happy to have someone to talk to about it.
But as often as not, researchers will either fail to respond, or ask whether and where the article will be published (this is even more true for government officials, who aren’t always cooperative with even the most reputable and established journalists.) The students then have to answer honestly that it may be published on SHERP’s online magazine, Scienceline, but they can’t promise that. (Some eventually adopt the strategy of saying that they are reporters for Scienceline, which is true, and even reporters for the New York Times don’t promise sources that an article will be published.)
The evidence that sources are discriminating against student journalists is mostly anecdotal, but I think it is compelling. One of our about-to-graduate students, Andy Han, is doing an internship at Science Friday. He tells me that when he uses his Science Friday email address to contact sources, nine out of ten respond to him, compared to only four or five when he uses his gmail account. And graduating student Rachel Feltman, former Editor in Chief of Scienceline, says that even saying one is writing for that publication does not always help much. “I’ve gotten really sad about how many of the new students get bullied by researchers,” Rachel says. She tells the story of a researcher who did agree to be interviewed, but then demanded that their quotes be changed after the story had been published. “I looked at it, and the student’s work was both factual and fair.” The source “figured they could strong arm the journalist into giving them their way because he’s a student.” Rachel concludes that “while many scientists have been wonderful, others have been patronizing at best and downright rude at worst.”
Now, I don’t want to give a one-sided picture of students’ experiences. There is no doubt that as they progress in the program, they become more confident, and their hit rate with sources improves. After all, having confidence in oneself is the best way to instill confidence in others. “Once I became brave enough to bother people into responding to me, I tended to eventually hear back from most sources I contacted,” says former SHERP student Kelly Slivka. And not everyone has this problem. Former student Taylor Kubota, for example, says that “a lot of my sources seemed more eager to speak to me because I was a student and they wanted to help me out. Being a student got my foot in the door, although it did often make my sources perceive me as young and uninformed–a misconception that was easily remedied once we spoke.”
And Nick Stockton, who will graduate from the program this month, says that we shouldn’t make ourselves “red with self-righteousness” if every scientist doesn’t “bow to the argument that [talking to students] is in the interests of science!” Nick says that we should “cut scientists a little slack” if they don’t respond to student queries. “Some scientists are busy, or egotistical, or are having a bad day, or have had a bad experience. So they want to talk to somebody they feel is worth their time, or with the experience to get things right.”
But I think Nick will forgive me if I suggest that students who have gone through three semesters of our rigorous program (no brag, just fact, as Walter Brennan used to say on that TV show most of you reading this are probably too young to remember) have learned how to handle difficult sources. They may have started out as student journalists, but they are full-fledged journalists now. And by the way, that transformation starts long before they graduate. Many of our students start doing internships at really big, important publications during their second semester. So, sources, the student you might not be eager to talk to today could be a New York Times reporter tomorrow, as William Herkewitz (who also graduates this month) demonstrated with a recent story in Science Times, about ocean drones, that took up pretty much the entire front page.
Will this appeal to the enlightened self-interest of scientists and officials be effective? I don’t know. It all depends on how enlightened and self-interested they really are–oh, and how much they care about the future of science journalism, their link to the public that funds them and whose support they badly need in this age of science denialism.
Note: Although a number of SHERP faculty agree with me in whole or part, the opinions above should be attributed to me alone and do not represent the official view of SHERP, New York University, its Board of Trustees, etc. etc.
_________
Michael Balter is a contributing correspondent at Science and an adjunct professor of journalism at New York University.
Photos: journalism students — University of Iowa Libraries; scientist — Bundesarchiv, Bild 183-M0719-0506 / Blunck / CC-BY-SA
Spam filters may be shutting students out. And even PIOs have trouble getting the time of day from some scientists, bless their hearts.
Part of the problem may be the use of a gmail account. Students should use their university account, making it possible to verify an identity.
Please remember that the scientists may be getting dozens of these requests a week. Some from journalism students and some from students in other classes who are trying to get an answer to their homework or writing assignment. I have heard of multiple cases where a considerate professor’s answering email got cut and pasted and handed in as the student’s work. This does not make for good relations between scientists and students. In fact some professors have made it a policy that they not communicate with students from other classes or other schools to minimize this type of plagiarism.
Do your students have a way to distinguish themselves in the eyes of the scientists (realize that I have no clue how good your journalism program is or what kind of training your students are getting)?
This piece is pretty spot on and captures a lot of the frustration I felt as a science journalism student. (Full disclosure – I was a former student of Michael’s, although at Boston University’s program, not NYU’S.) However, now I’m a media relations officer for a major science institution and I can see the other side of the coin. Given my experiences, here’s some advice I can offer current and future scijo students:
Don’t write the article that everyone else is writing. If there’s an embargoed paper from Science or Nature coming out, chances are every established journalist is also reading it and putting in interview requests. As someone who manages scientists’ time and interview schedules, I can tell you that if 50 journalists want an interview in a 1-hour window, sadly, students just aren’t going to make the cut. Our executives want to see coverage in the national outlets.
Do the grunt work. Don’t rely on press releases or tip sheets – read obscure journals that don’t have a smooth PR machine. The researchers publishing there will be thrilled to speak with you, and you’ll get a scoop that no one else has. There’s some really great stuff hidden out there!
However, if that big paper really speaks to you, find a fresh angle. Don’t parrot the press release. Dig deeper, are there any unanswered questions? If you’re willing to wait a day and don’t need to publish the second the embargo lifts, you’re more likely to get phone time for a more thorough conversation after the initial rush. (Related advice – talk to a second or third author, or a grad student or postdoc instead of the PI.)
The internal debate over whether to admit up front that you’re a student and not a “real” journalist is a tough one. That choice is personal, but regardless of which way you do it, don’t rely on “I’m a writer” or “I’m a student” to get your foot in the door. Demonstrate that you have some knowledge of the paper/study/work and say what, specifically, you’d like to talk about. Let the scientist know that YOU know what you’re talking about, and that his or her time will not be wasted giving a Biology 101 lecture, but will be an intriguing and thoughtful conversation.
But most of all, keep at it! You’ve made it this far, and have learned valuable lessons that will carry over into your career. And that’s what school is all about, right?
Thanks to everyone for their comments, especially Lauren Rugani, who was indeed a student in the first science journalism class I ever taught (BU 2008, how time flies.)
Lauren’s wise and constructive thoughts are testimony to the high caliber of professional journalists that all of these SciJo programs turn out, all the more reason why sources should talk to them in their formative years!
Here’s a flipside suggestion – try talking to the students, postdocs, and other junior researchers involved. They are often happy for the attention, given that journos typically want to talk to the PI instead of them (the people who’ve frequently done most of the actual work, I might add). Furthermore, you could make many of the same arguments about the preparedness and ability of the students/postdocs as you make here about the journalism students.
Thanks Bryan, a good suggestion when it works. The problem is that reporters contacting the authors of a scientific paper generally need to start with the corresponding author, who has been appointed by an entire research team to respond to inquiries. Sometimes the corresponding author is the head of the lab or group, sometimes it is the first author, often a postdoc or grad student. But reporters normally have to start with that person or they could end up wasting their time.