2001 SCIENCE-IN-SOCIETY AWARDS REFLECT EXPANDED CATEGORIES

by Carol Cruzan Morton

Stories about the seriously flawed national flu vaccine program, the historic decoding of the human genome, the struggle to preserve the New England fish population, the inadequate science behind the country's dietary fat dictates, troubling questions about depleted uranium lingering in former war zones, and the tantalizing potential of methane hydrates all earned top honors for journalists in the 2001 Science-in-Society Journalism Awards, presented by the National Association of Science Writers.

Being honored at a February 14 reception hosted by Boston University are Vermont author and journalist David Dobbs; independent producer Betsey Arledge, NOVA staff producer Julia Cort and correspondent Robert Krulwich for NOVA/WGBH-TV in Boston; San Francisco Chronicle reporters Sabin Russell, Reynolds Holding, and Elizabeth Fernandez; Gary Taubes, writing for Science magazine; David Tenenbaum, writer for University of Wisconsin's The Why Files; and Harald Franzen writing for ScientificAmerican.com.

NASW holds the independent competition--without subsidy from any professional or commercial interest--to honor outstanding investigative and interpretive reporting about the sciences and their impact on society for good and bad. Winners each receive $1,000 and a certificate of recognition.

In the book category, the judges awarded a prize to Dobbs for The Great Gulf which examined the conflict between scientists and fishermen struggling to preserve the New England fish population. The book showed how the confluence of science, history, and politics in the region has created the perfect storm of science and society. Since the 1980s, increasingly stringent fishing regulations for the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank have meant that two well-meaning groups-scientists from the National Marine Fisheries Service and commercial fishermen-are often at odds over how many fish can be safely taken from the ecosystem.

By focusing on the efforts and lives of a few individuals, Dobbs created a balanced, engaging story, told with vigor and insight, and even a touch of humor, as this excerpt shows: "A reasonable person might ask whether any of this mattered. Obviously it mattered a lot to the fishermen, who resented that Fisheries Service formulas allowed little room for the sort of anecdotal knowledge that fishermen possessed in abundance. ('You want to piss off a room full of fishermen,' Jay Burnett told me a few months later in this same scientist's lounge, 'just say the word anecdotal.')"

It's not easy to hold the attention of a television audience for a two-hour documentary-especially on the intimidating topic of molecular biology. This year's winning TV entry, "Cracking the Code of Life," presented the complex story of the sequencing of the human genome with accuracy, a noted inquisitiveness, and even humor. Judges particularly commended the producers for clearly elucidating the biological, cultural, and social ramifications of this intricate endeavor. For those coming to this multifaceted topic with an incomplete grasp of the science and other complexities, it was a splendid primer on perhaps the most important science story of the year.

The two-year project began as a story of the race to sequence the human genome, told in a pivotal year through the experiences of the people at the two main competing labs, Celera Genomics (a private company) and the Whitehead Institute at MIT, the largest NIH-sponsored group, said Betsey Arledge. With extensive inside access, film crews recorded fresh reactions of key scientists as events unfolded. Usually, much of storytelling is uncovered after the fact. In this case, when the story was nearly finished editing, scientific papers published in February 2001 revealed so much new and unexpected information (such as a reduced number of genes, the similarities in DNA between us and every other species) that the team rewrote, re-interviewed people, and found new visual materials.

In the newspaper category, the San Francisco Chronicle told a compelling and suspenseful story about the flu vaccine industry that reminded some judges of Upton Sinclair's accounts of the meat industry nearly a century ago. With their riveting and penetrating account, the reporters revealed the underbelly of the health system. The shaky collaboration between government and commercial forces depends, in large part, on 400,000 chicken eggs a day.

News reporting is often directed toward the future dangers of scientific developments, judges noted, but this story shows the risk from wide-scale implementation of a scientific achievement today. The result was a shocking look at the modern intersection of science and public health.

Last fall's national chaos signaled a clear warning to Russell, a science reporter, about a flawed system that warranted greater understanding. He teamed up with Holding, who has a strong legal background, and Fernandez, an investigative reporter. Investigative efforts ranged from Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to meeting transcripts of obscure committees of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control. What emerged was a picture of a fragile system being pushed beyond its limits to vaccinate as many people as possible.

"All it takes is a subtle little genetic change in flu viruses and we could have a pandemic like in 1918," said Russell, who hopes their stories add pressure to correct the system's vulnerabilities. "I'd hate to write a story about how we were taken by surprise. The great irony was that even though we weren't ready and there were temporary shortages and panic buying, it was one of mildest flu seasons on record. There couldn't have been a more painless way to get serious warning."

Taubes won his third Science-in-Society award with his magazine story, "The soft science of dietary fat." Following his prizewinning technique of evaluating how inadequate scientific tools are used to dictate important national health issues-what people should eat-he once again shows there is still much to be mined in a topic long considered settled and indisputable. With painstaking research and in-depth reporting, he challenges the accepted wisdom on dietary fat and displays the chinks in its armor. Many of his reported findings are still controversial, yet judges lauded his risk-taking reporting, making us think twice about obsessing about our dietary choices.

Taubes, a freelance writer, spent a year on the story mostly supported by other writing projects. Each story in this vein takes longer than the last, he said. For this one, he interviewed about 150 people. As a result, in his own shopping Taubes ignores the nationally approved health advice and hunts, sometimes in vain, for yogurt made out of whole milk, and puts his faith in vegetables and exercise to extend his life instead of skinless chicken.

Two people shared the Web award, given for the first time this year to support laudable efforts in the new media. Both winners used mostly text to tell complex international stories, in part from a philosophy to reach as many people as possible on potentially slow home modems that make up a large share of the Web audience, whose computers might be stalled by large video, audio, and graphic files.

Using the excuse of rising gas prices, Dave Tenenbaum followed up on a long-standing interest in the tantalizing potential of methane hydrates, a vast, hard-to-tap resource deep in the crust. He deftly navigated among points of view ranging from Wall Street demands for profitable new energy sources and scientific concerns about global warming.

Following up on a tip from his dad, a radiologist in Germany, Franzen asked what happens when war ends and the shooting stops. Depleted uranium-used in the Gulf War and the Allied bombing of Yugoslavia and Kosovo-has been hailed as the military's new silver bullet and condemned as the Agent Orange of the Balkan conflict. The question is now whether the abundant, armor-piercing metal that lies scattered over a wide area of the Balkans presents a health threat to soldiers and civilians. Franzen explored the physics of radiology, the biology of exposure, and the science of modern weapons. Much of the controversy has focused on leukemia. So far, investigating health organizations haven't found higher rates of leukemia, but believe some caution is warranted. The story has been widely-sometimes badly-reported in Europe, but has not received much attention in this country.

Last year, the Science-in-Society Awards expanded from three categories (newspapers, magazines, and television and radio) to six categories (newspapers, magazines, television, radio, Web, and book). Work must have been written or spoken in English, intended for the lay person, and published or broadcast in North America between June 1, 2000 and May 31, 2001. No prizes were awarded this year in the radio category.

The award committee was co-chaired by Beryl Benderly, freelance and book author in Washington D.C., and Carol Cruzan Morton, Boston Globe and Harvard Medical School, in Boston. In the first stage of judging, finalists were selected from more than 140 entries by committees composed of Steve Tally, Purdue University (book committee chair); Sara Latta, freelance; Michael Lemonick, Time magazine; Sally Maran, Smithsonian magazine; Tom Watkins (broadcast committee chair), CNN; Gary Schwitzer, University of Minnesota; Beverly Orndorff, Richmond Times-Dispatch (newspaper committee chair); Lewis Cope, freelance and Minneapolis Star Tribune; A.J. Hostetler, Richmond Times-Dispatch; Lynn Nystrom, news director, Virginia Tech; Eric Schoch, Indiana University School of Medicine (Web committee chair); Cindy Fox Aisen, Howard Hughes Medical Institute; Marti LaChance, Indiana University School of Medicine; Beryl Lieff Benderly, freelance (magazine committee chair); Avery Comarow, US News and World Report; Robin Marantz Henig, freelance; Jack Wiley, Smithsonian. Winners were chosen by the final judging committee of Marcia Bartusiak, author; Sherry Lassiter, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Media Lab and documentary film producer; Robert Lee Hotz, Los Angeles Times; Ellen Shell, Boston University and Atlantic Monthly; Diane Toomey, Living On Earth. The awards are administered by NASW Executive Director Diane McGurgan.

The deadline for submission of entries for the 2002 Science-in-Society Awards is July 1, 2002, for work published or broadcast in North America between June 1, 2001 and May 31, 2002. For more information, visit nasw.org/society.htm.

#

Carol Cruzan Morton is a freelance and a science writer for the Harvard Medical School Office of Public Affairs.