Fellow scientists always get a laugh when I tell them my first publication was in The Dallas Morning News.

That article (about fish fat and how it helps fight depression) was the first tangible product of my AGU-sponsored participation in the Mass Media Science and Engineering Fellows Program, sponsored by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).  The program sends science and engineering graduate students to media organizations across the country for 10-week summer stints as science journalists.  The objective is to strengthen the connections between scientists and journalists and improve coverage of science in the media.

My first article appeared in the weekly health and science "Discoveries" section of the Morning News, just 7 days after my arrival in Dallas.  But my education on the delicate symbiosis between science and the media began before I even set out on the 4-day drive to my summer destination.

The week before heading down to Texas, I joined the two dozen other AAAS Mass Media Fellows in Washington, D.C., for a crash course in science journalism from some of the field's top names.  We toured the studios of National Public Radio and heard from writers and editors at Science and "Discovery Online."

In the 10 weeks that followed, I wrote roughly a dozen articles for the Morning News.  Their subjects were disciplines for which my training as an atmospheric scientist left me less than fully prepared.  By summer's end, I had written articles on quantum cryptography, chiral chemistry, and drug-induced sex reversal in fish, and probably learned more science than in all my college classes combined.  But back to my first story.

With potentially more than a million Texans pouring over my prose, I did not take my first assignment lightly.  Less than a week into the fellowship, I was instructed by my editor to write a thorough, engaging article on a subject I knew almost nothing about.

"Make no mistakes; and have it on my desk by tomorrow," he said.  "And stop using the passive voice."

That first assignment took me a few blocks down the street to the Dallas Convention Center, where thousands of food technologists had gathered for their annual meeting.  My duty was to listen to the presentaton on fish fat and interview the speaker before he could scurry out of the room.

On arriving, I realized I would have to make a decision: accost a total stranger who would undoubtedly expose my ignorance on the subject or face the fiery wrath of my editor.

Surprisingly, the scientist was more than willing to talk to me.  And, after quickly discovering that I was no expert in omega-3 fatty acides, he helped me understand the implications of his results for technologists and non-technologists alike.  Still, my grasp of the research itself remained somewhat sketchy, so my editor suggested I call a local researcher to get his perspective on the study.  To my surprise, the second scientist was equally helpful.

This seemed to present a contradiction.  Up to that point, my own experience with scientists and the media had been of the grumbling researcher bemoaning the abysmal portrayal of science in newspapers and on television.  My colleagues' opinion of science journalists seemed to range from derisive to downright damning.  Had I stumbled upon the only two scientists who did not hold these views?  Did this explain their willingness to talk to journalists?

My next assignment--a study in which scientists used a magnetic field to manipulate the structure of a molecule--seemed to answer my question.  All of the scientists I spoke to were enthusiastic in their explanations (though somewhat reserved in their opinions).  Could it be that, while publicly disdaining the media, scientists actually enjoyed discussing their research with journalists?

Over the summer, as I researched and composed the remainder of my stories, the overwhelming conclusion was "yes."  Quantum physicists, environmental chemists, forest ecologists--even meteorologists--were cooperative and helpful.

As a conclusion to this article, I would like to offer kudos to AGU members who have spoken with science writers in the past and plan to continue doing so.  My fellowship experience taught me what I believe most scientists already know: that science journalists are not out to make us look bad, or skew the facts; but rather, are avid supporters of scientific research and staunch defenders of the scientific process.

My co-workers in the "Discoveries" department at the News were some of the most professional, hard-working individuals I have ever encountered.  Their attention to detail and insistence on accuracy and fairness was unequalled.  And despite (in some cases) decades of experience covering the same beat, their enthusiasm for new discoveries has never waned.

Now, 5 months after my first article appeared in the News, I have two "real" articles in press at respected scholarly periodicals.  Their acceptance has, I think, rescued me in the eyes of my colleagues, many of whom feared openly that I'd been blinded by the glare of the media limelight!

If any of them asks, I will certainly remark that "coverage of science in the media is appalling."  But when, a few months from now, I stand in of my Ph.D. committee, defending the fruits of 5 years' labor in an obscure area of science, I'll be glad there are journalists out here to make the work of scientists like me sound more exciting and important than I ever thought it could.

Matthew Carr, AGU Mass Media Fellow, 2000
 

Return to AGU's Mass Media Fellowship page
Return to AGU Services for the Media page