Barriers between journalists and scientists can make journalists’ jobs more difficult, and they can lead to unintentional misinformation and confusion. These barriers have a lot to do with the vastly different environments in which journalists and scientists operate.
One of the biggest barriers is the perception each group has of the other.
Scientists say: Journalists are imprecise and impatient. They may know enough to be dangerous, but they are not well-informed; their goal is to make headlines, not necessarily share the facts, which are much more complicated than they are sensational.
Journalists say: Scientists either ignore interview requests or respond too late. They can also be hard to talk to and often seem distant and arrogant.
Journalists can break through the perception barriers by doing a bit of research before an interview and by being respectfully persistent when dealing with scientists. In other words, journalists have to practice good journalism.
Journalists also need to understand that scientists’ jobs don’t require them to answer media inquiries. Their livelihoods often do, however, require them to spend time in their labs, which means they may not answer office phones or check emails regularly. Figuring out a scientist’s work schedule may require some sleuthing; getting the needed information quickly, to meet a deadline, might require making calls to a university’s public information officers for help gaining access.
Taken from Whose Truth? Tools for Smart Science Journalism in the Digital Age, a self-directed course by Elissa Yancey at Poynter NewsU.
