[Readings:05] On getting the message across

The main goal of both the scholar and the journalist is to disclose valuable information that the public needs for the purpose at hand.

By blogging, scientists finally found a way to “let the public know” about their works and findings through the “new media” mainly by blogging, dissing the “old media” that never seemed to give them the attention and credible coverage they deserved all those times. But this schism betweeen journalists and scientists cannot continue, the article “Science journalism: Supplanting the old media?” seems to say, because the public needs both: “They have to recognize the needs of the journalist, but we have to recognize the needs of the scientists. We’re kind of fusing the two cultures.”

Just the title of another article itself, “Public Praises Science; Scientists Fault Public, Media” indicates that science in relation to journalism and vice versa do not exist in a social vacuum. In a nutshell, the article showed that the rift between scientists and the media and the public may possibly come to mutual understanding, the most important factor being the ability to know more about the realities of their (American) science. Sad as it may, the results of the poll in this article may not be the same in the Philippine context where the culture of science and research has not quite got into the consciousness of the average Pinoy.

Such grim situation probably led the article “Science [Mis]communication” to ask, “So if many readers aren’t paying enough attention to understand the nuances of complex science, is there any point in attempting to report science to non-experts?” To be able to do so, the article noted a four-step strategy: Understanding the audience, determining the message, deciding on strategies, and measuring success. Furthermore, what seemed to be the determing factor is identifying and writing apprpriately for the audience.

One way of reaching to as many people as possible is through informative yet short and engaging articles. Roy Peter Clark, points out (both in “How to Write a Good Story in 800 Words or Less” and “How Humor Can Make Your Writing More Powerful“) that writers sometimes have to take the chance to get their point across more easily–either through humor and/or through thawing the ice cubes of traditional writing and just letting the story flow.