Re: How the science journalism collaboration will operate

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 10:26 PM, Scott Mintz <scott.w.mintz@gmail.com> wrote:

Okay, so I've done tweaking based on Todd's version; for better or worse. I provided notes and have a couple of questions.

NOTES:

(1)               In all instances where we say should and/or expect, etc., Ive replaced it with will.

(2)               I also tried to make things more concise where I saw possible.

(3)               I re-worded some things so neither journalists nor scientists are viewed as central to the project

QUESTIONS:

(1)               What exactly is a by-line credit and what constitutes requiring recognition? Shouldnt scientist always receive recognition?

(2)               Will articles be spread through Project PM as well, increasing each articles reach?

This project will improve the quality of science journalism by coupling freelance journalists and scientists while utilizing media contacts to achieve publication.

Scientists and science-based practitioners (such as healthcare professionals and engineers) will work with freelance journalists in identifying story ideas; research; and contacting qualified sources, both for background information and quotations.

Participating scientists will see increased media attention to their area of expertise, publicity for themselves and their institutions/sponsors, and by-line credit if the level of contribution merits such recognition. Also, there is the bonus of not getting heartburn reading media reports that mangle their areas of knowledge.

Participating journalists will produce articles of greater accuracy than the current norm. Furthermore, higher quality articles will result in an increase in published works.

Participating media experts will help get articles published. For example, they can strategize the best publications to contact, provide contact information for particular editors and/or publications, help formulate the pitch, and provide assistance in getting the piece sold.

We are enlisting interested scientists and freelancers in order to create a database with their areas of interest and expertise. Eventually, pairs will be created based on this database. Each pair will decide on the particulars of the articles to be produced and on their collaborative processes. However, unique to the Science Journalism Project is an explicit recognition that journalists and scientists dont always work on deadlines in a similar way. Therefore, mutual respect and understanding will be necessary to keep to deadlines.

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 10:13 PM, Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com> wrote:
We don't mind at all. As for deadlines, I agree with you that we don't want to avoid them entirely to the detriment of our effectiveness; I had meant that part as general advice, but of course we want the writer-scientist pairs to make those decisions for themselves. I'll make sure the announcement and other explanatory materials gets that across; will probably just mention briefly that the pairs might find it more convenient to do non-deadline pieces to start off with but that of course it's entirely up to them.

If anyone has any further input, try let me know today/tomorrow so that I can ensure that the announcement article incorporates everything that it needs to.

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:06 PM, Todd Essig <tessig@me.com> wrote:

This exchange has been very helpful and interesting, so much so that I'm making a tentative step towards getting in the game. I further tweaked Mano's tweak, also with an audience in mind of potential scientist-participants.

About that deadline thing, IDK. Having been caught in the deadline crunch as a source talking with journalists with their hair on fire over their deadline I appreciate the need to protect our volunteer scientists. But I've also pitched a couple of articles (Barret, I did this with David DiSalvo who I met while we were all at True/Slant -- RIP) and feel eliminating deadlines will significantly diminish our value. So I did more than a tweak on that part. I hope y'all don't mind my suggesting an alternative process built more on mutual respect rather than suggesting a specific process that many editors might not like.

--Todd

-------------------------------------------
Todd Essig, Ph.D.

Training and Supervising Analyst, William Alanson White Institute
Psychology Today (http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/over-simulated)
-------------------
59 West 12th Street
NYC, NY 10011
212 633-2725
-------------------------------------------

Science journalism project

The purpose of this project is to improve the quality of science journalism by bringing together freelance journalists, scientists, and people with both media expertise and publishing contacts.

Scientists and science-based practitioners (such as healthcare professionals or engineers) will assist freelance journalists by identifying potential story ideas; providing assistance with research; and putting writers in touch with other qualified sources, both for background information and quotations. Participating scientists can expect several benefits: more media attention given to one's own area of expertise; publicity for themselves, their institutions, and their sponsors; and even by-line credit if the level of contribution merits such recognition. Also, there is the bonus of not getting heartburn reading media reports that mangle their areas of knowledge.

Participating journalists can expect to produce articles and presentations of better quality and higher accuracy than the current norm without losing popular appeal. Hopefully, they will also be able to see more of their work published.

Participating media experts will help get these articles published. If, for example, a freelancer requests assistance placing an article, the media expert can help strategize the best publications to contact, provide contact information for particular editors or publications, help formulate the pitch, and generally assist getting the piece sold.

The structure under development begins by enlisting interested scientists and freelancers and then creates a database based on information from each on their areas of interest and expertise. Journalist-scientist pairs will be created based on the information in the data-base. Each pair will decide on the particulars of the articles to be produced and on the collaborative processes that will work with each specific pair. However, unique to the Science Journalism Project is an explicit recognition that journalists work on deadlines in a way that scientists do not. Therefore, each will be encouraged to respect the unique time-demands each of them has. We expect mutual respect and understanding will avoid situations in which a writer misses a deadline (YIKES!) because the scientist's schedule may not allow for him or her to provide the necessary assistance in time.

On Sep 30, 2010, at 5:57 PM, Mano Singham wrote:

Like Barrett, I use the word scientist to cover anyone with expertise in any broadly defined area of science, which would include scientists, engineers, and those in the medical professions. "Academics" is, as I see it, is a description of the nature of one's work and is not discipline specific, so I do not see any need for specific mention of it.

Mano Singham, Director
University Center for Innovation in Teaching and Education (UCITE)
Allen Building 101, LC 7025
Case Western Reserve
10900 Euclid Avenue
Cleveland, OH 44106
Phone : 216-368-1224
Fax       : 216-368-0197
Email : mano.singham@case.edu
Website : http://www.case.edu/provost/UCITE

On Sep 30, 2010, at 5:26 PM, Barrett Brown wrote:

Mano, thanks for these revisions.

Scott, I've been using "scientists" as shorthand for "people with backgrounds in science;" I'll make it clear that we mean the latter in the actual announcement article for Skeptic. This will include academics as well.

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 5:23 PM, Scott Mintz <scott.w.mintz@gmail.com> wrote:
Unfortunately I don't have the time right now to respond, nor have I read the entire thing, but in the first paragraph alone I noticed something. We list journalists, scientists, and people with media expertise, etc., but this doesn't seem to cover the likes of my dentist. Maybe my dentist goes beyond the scope of this project.

Furthermore, shouldn't we include academics here?

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 5:12 PM, Mano Singham <mano.singham@case.edu> wrote:

Hi Barrett,

Thanks a lot for this. I have taken the liberty of tweaking it a bit and am submitting it for the group's feedback before proceeding.

Mano

Science journalism project

The purpose of this project is to create a structure that would result in improvements in science journalism directed at laymen. The triad making up this structure would consist of freelance journalists, scientists, and people with media expertise and contacts.

The freelance journalists would benefit by having access to scientists who would provide guidance in terms of identifying potential story ideas, providing assistance with research, putting the writers in touch with other qualified sources who would in turn be able to provide quotes and specific background information, and otherwise helping to ensure that the resulting articles are of better quality and accuracy than those that currently tend to appear in mainstream publications.

Participating scientists would benefit from having their own areas of research getting more attention in the media, their own names and institutions receiving publicity, and on occasion being co-authors if the level of their contributions merit it.  There is also the bonus of not getting heartburn at seeing mangled interpretations of their areas of science reported in the media.

The project members possessing backgrounds in media will provide assistance in facilitating the publication of these articles. If, for example, the freelancer in question requests assistance in placing an article, they can provide contact information for particular editors or publications and otherwise assist in the very necessary process of getting the piece sold.

Generally, the process will entail enlisting both science and freelancers, creating a database based on information from each on their areas of interest and expertise, and then putting them in contact based on that information. Although the particulars of the articles to be produced and the specific process involved can be decided by each respective pair, we advise them to proceed by coming up with an article idea and then having the freelancer query one or more editors on their interest in such a piece and then turn in the results upon completion, rather than making such arrangements that might involve a particular deadline. Such a process ensures that our volunteer scientists can assist on their own schedules and also prevents a writer from missing a deadline in such cases when the scientist's schedule may not allow for him or her to provide the necessary assistance in time.

Mano Singham, Director
University Center for Innovation in Teaching and Education (UCITE)
Allen Building 101, LC 7025
Case Western Reserve
10900 Euclid Avenue
Cleveland, OH 44106
Phone : 216-368-1224
Fax       : 216-368-0197
Email : mano.singham@case.edu
Website : http://www.case.edu/provost/UCITE

On Sep 30, 2010, at 3:41 PM, Barrett Brown wrote:

Here's a summary of how the sci-journ program will work. Mano, I can expand on this if you can think of anything else that ought to be addressed, and will send along the announcement article later today.

The purpose of this project is to encourage improvements in science journalism directed at

laymen by pairing freelance writers with scientists who would provide guidance in terms of

identifying potential story ideas, providing assistance with research, putting the writers

in touch with other qualified sources who would in turn be able to provide quotes and

specific background info, and otherwise helping to ensure that the resulting articles are

of better quality and accuracy than those that currently tend to appear in mainstream

publications. Other project members possessing backgrounds in media will also provide

assistance in facilitating the publication of these articles.

Generally, the process will entail enlisting both science and freelancers, getting a bit

of info from each on their areas of interest and expertise, and then putting them in

contact based on that info. Although the particulars of the articles to be produced and

the specific process involved can be decided by each respective pair, we advise them to

proceed by coming up with an article idea and then having the freelancer query one or more

editors on their interest in such a piece and then turn in the results upon completion,

rather than making such arrangements that might involve a particular dealine; such a

process ensures that our volunteer scientists can assist on their own schedules and also

prevents a writer from missing a deadline in such cases as the scientist's schedule may

not allow for him to provide the necessary assistance in time. If the freelancer in

question requests assistance in placing an article, we can provide contact info for

particular editors or publications and otherwise assist in the very necessary process of

getting the piece sold.

On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:29 PM, Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi, all-

Sorry for the delayed response.

Scott - The fellow you mention and the dentist would both be ideal for our purposes.

Mano - I will provide more specific info regarding what we would be asking of our participants very soon; am finishing up the Skeptical Inquirer announcement tonight and will forward to all of you before I send it along to the Skeptics Society.

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:46 PM, Scott Mintz <scott.w.mintz@gmail.com> wrote:
I was actually about to send out an email on this subject, but Mano beat me to it and was much more direct.

On the investing website I belong to there is a Coffee Shop section where I can make a request for interest. However, beyond roles and responsibilities, I'd like to get a better idea, or at least, hone in on the main purpose and who would be useful.

For example, one member of the aforementioned websites comes to mind. He has a history of evaluating clinical trials of certain publicly traded medical companies. Would this be a person of interest? Also, regarding Mano's email, what will be the extent of his obligations. I ask since although he worked for over two decades doing Hematology & Medical Oncology, he's retired now and likes to spend his time investing.

Would my dentist who informed me recently that, contrary to the prior thought process, receding gum lines are caused by bacteria rather than overaggressive brushing be a candidate? He'd be willing to participate.

Scott

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:32 PM, Mano Singham <mano.singham@case.edu> wrote:

Since this is a new venture, I am pretty comfortable with roles evolving but if I am going to approach colleagues to get involved I wioll need to be a little bit more specific about what kind of role and responsibilities they are committing to.

Do you have a paragraph or so on this topic that I could send to them along with my endorsement?

Mano

Mano Singham, Director
University Center for Innovation in Teaching and Education (UCITE)
Allen Building 101, LC 7025
Case Western Reserve
10900 Euclid Avenue
Cleveland, OH 44106
Phone : 216-368-1224
Fax       : 216-368-0197
Email : mano.singham@case.edu
Website : http://www.case.edu/provost/UCITE

On Sep 27, 2010, at 5:26 PM, Barrett Brown wrote:

It's wide open; I think that most any field should present opportunities for articles that would interest editors. Thanks again, Mano. Let me know if you have any other questions.

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Mano Singham <mano.singham@case.edu> wrote:

I can try and recruit some scientists but do you have any fields in mind or is this wide open?

Mano Singham, Director
University Center for Innovation in Teaching and Education (UCITE)
Allen Building 101, LC 7025
Case Western Reserve
10900 Euclid Avenue
Cleveland, OH 44106
Phone : 216-368-1224
Fax       : 216-368-0197
Email : mano.singham@case.edu
Website : http://www.case.edu/provost/UCITE

On Sep 27, 2010, at 3:04 PM, Barrett Brown wrote:

Thought you all would enjoy this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1

Also, I'm writing up an announcement for the science/journalism project for Skeptical Inquirer and have also gotten a couple of noted freelance writers to sign on. I also hope to recruit a few more scientists to start out with, so if you happen to know anyone who might be interested in working a bit with our freelancers at the outset by providing them basic subject matter and then going over the resulting article to ensure accuracy, please let me know when you get a moment.

--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
512-560-2302

--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
512-560-2302

--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
512-560-2302

--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
512-560-2302

--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
512-560-2302

--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
512-560-2302