Convening in a chilly air-conditioned ballroom, a panel of four journalists described their experiences writing about the sordid side of science. Organized and moderated by Brooke Borel, a freelance journalist and author, the "Investigative reporting: Uncovering the seedy side of science" session touched on misconduct, harassment, and corruption in science.
Featured news
Starry-eyed and determined, only the slightest tinge of desperation in their eyes betrayed mentees to the self-assured and confident mentors at the One Minute Mentor Special Lunch. At three tables of 10, the conversation bubbled and rose into the clangor of a trade floor, mentees excavating mentors’ minds for their experience, advice and encouragement.
ScienceWriters2016 attendees filled both tables in the sunroom of the Omni La Mansión del Rio dining room that were designated for the lunch discussion on NASW Idea Grants.
The highly anticipated, and potentially contentious, business meeting at ScienceWriters2016 is over, and members of the NASW — all 2,534 of them — are breathing a collective sigh of relief following a respectful and informative discussion.
Awards night for the National Association of Science Writers and Council for the Advancement of Science Writing highlighted not only great science writing but the benefits of putting feet to the pavement to find the untold stories.
Basic research looks for universal truths, which are usually expressed in the form of physical laws and general theorems. In contrast, scientists and audiences have heterogeneous backgrounds and deal with constantly evolving issues. Therefore, journalists and PIOs should recognize cultural diversity as a key factor of their storytelling strategies.
Pitch slam for ScienceWriters2016 began in a bustling room of science writers of all ages with various levels of experience, many of whom came prepared with story ideas. A panel of seven editors from the Atlantic, the Washington Post, National Geographic, Motherboard, Nature, COSMOS, and Aeon were eager to listen to these pitches.
How do successful feature writers come up with the "lightbulb" ideas that become compelling articles? Journalists Florence Williams and Amanda Little (who also teaches journalism at Vanderbilt University) and Wired deputy editor Adam Rogers presented a variety of ways of sparking the process.
Most of us serve as the first and perhaps only fact-checker of our own work. “Learning how to fact-check can help writers become better reporters,” Brooke Borel asserts in The Chicago Guide to Fact-Checking. Fact-checking is reporting in reverse, she says. You need to fact-check everything, even the thing you just checked last week, and even things you think you know are true, she insists. You also need to identify what’s missing, and whether that undermines the accuracy of your work. Borel tells how to check facts from a variety of sources, including analogies, product claims, press releases, and maps and atlases. She also offers tips on keeping good records of your sources.