Author Archives: Matthew Wright

For Immediate Release
March 28, 2019

Contact: Christine Dell’Amore
rueparadis@gmail.com
newsbriefaward@gmail.com

Winners Announced for Tenth Annual DCSWA Newsbrief Award

Washington, D.C.— A digital story about mischievous ravens and a video about the surprising qualities of soap have won the tenth annual D.C. Science Writers Association’s Newsbrief Awards.

Longform journalism often gets our accolades, but short pieces are the true workhorses of science communication. In the spirit of recognizing these unsung works of excellence, we have been offering the Newsbrief Awards since 2009. In 2015, we added a Multimedia category.

For the 2018 award, two separate panels of distinguished science writers judged more than 50 entries.

In the Writing category, Emily Conover won for her story “How ravens caused a LIGO data glitch” in Science News magazine. Judges were particularly impressed by Conover’s newsgathering skills, as she discovered this gem while covering a physics conference. “We loved her commitment to the poem as a framing device—simple but effective,” one judge said. Conover is also the first person to win a Newsbrief Award twice; she won in 2015 for her story “How to prevent a sheep traffic jam” in Science Magazine.

Conover is the physics reporter for Science News. She writes about black holes, subatomic particles, and why Einstein is still right after all these years. She earned her Ph.D. in physics from the University of Chicago, then transitioned from science to science writing through a AAAS Mass Media Fellowship at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and an internship at Science Magazine. Before joining Science News, she worked at the American Physical Society.

In the Multimedia category, Tien Nguyen earned top prize for her video “Surprising particle filters made from self-healing soap films” on Chemical & Engineering News. “We were impressed by the variety of video sources and voices incorporated into the piece,” said one judge.

Nguyen is an assistant editor for C&EN, a weekly news magazine published by the American Chemical Society. She has previously written stories and scripts for New Scientist, Princeton University, Scientific American, TED-Ed, and VICE News. She received her Ph.D. in chemistry at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

An honorable mention in the Multimedia category went to Tina Hesman Saey and Helen Thompson for their Science News video “What is DNA recombination?” Thompson received an additional honorable mention for the video “How dandelion seeds fly.”

Hesman Saey’s DNA is everywhere. As the senior writer, molecular biology at Science News magazine, Tina got her DNA tested by eight different companies and analyzed by an additional five for a series on consumer genetic testing. She is a graduate of the Boston University science journalism program, holds a Ph.D. in molecular genetics from Washington University in St. Louis, and a bachelor of science with honors from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, where she majored in biology. Tina covered biotechnology and medical science at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch prior to joining the Science News staff 11 years ago.  

Thompson is associate digital editor at Science News, where she oversees content on the website and video production. She has written for numerous science publications including Smithsonian, NPR, National Geographic, and Nature. Thompson studied biology and English at Trinity University in San Antonio, and also received a master’s degree in science writing from Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore.

An award ceremony will take place on Saturday, April 13, during DCSWA’s annual Professional Development Day at the George Washington University Milken Institute School of Public Health in Washington, D.C. Each winning team will receive $300 and a trophy; those awarded honorable mentions will receive certificates.

DCSWA members were eligible to submit entries published between January 1 and December 31, 2018. The D.C. Science Writers Association is an organization of more than 500 science reporters, editors, authors, and public information officers based in the national capital area. Details on how to enter the 2019 Newsbrief Award will appear on the DCSWA website by the end of the year.

Photos of the winners are available upon request.

######

By Wayne Pereanu

For journalists covering federal agencies, the first words that come to mind when thinking about a public information officer (or PIO) may be “censorship,” “roadblock,” or “message control.” When a journalist encounters a PIO who denies access to a source of information, it’s easy to see where this bias can come from.

But Rick Borchelt, director of communications and public affairs for the Department of Energy’s Office of Science, provided a different perspective during DCSWA’s 2018 Professional Development Day afternoon plenary talk. He argued that journalists and PIOs share a still-relevant common ancestry. And this relationship may be best viewed as non-adversarial, between colleagues who ultimately share many of the same values, Borchelt said.

Borchelt’s talk provided a historical context that blurred the line between early science journalism and PIOs, described where the role of a PIO came from, and explored what it means to be a PIO today. To accomplish this, he shared historical anecdotes and personal reflections from his career as a communications officer at various federal agencies. Borchelt also implored the audience to quit using the term PIO, as it does not reflect an actual job description, but instead connotes more of a tribal identity.

Borchelt first brought us to the years after World War I to investigate how early science journalism fell somewhere between unbiased objectivity and advocacy. During this time, organizations such as Science Service (today known as Society for Science & the Public) formed with the goal of informing, educating, and inspiring the public. In step with this, science journalism of the era promoted science in a positive light, rather than being critical or objective.

Borchelt illustrated this point by invoking a compelling example: the 1923 Pulitzer Prize in journalism. Alva Johnson earned this prestigious award for his report that simply covered the 1922 American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) meeting. It would be years before science journalism would aim to be unbiased and objective, rather than just positive coverage. This historical analysis may be surprising, as Borchelt noted that early science journalism was closer to what some may think of as a PIO’s role.

Having established the principles of early science journalism, Borchelt next examined the origin of the PIO position. He went through examples of early U.S. propaganda efforts during World War I, as well as the weaponization of information by Germans in World War II. In response to these events, U.S. legislators passed the Labor-Federal Security Appropriation Act of 1952. The Act attempted to proscribe propaganda by defining improper types of publicity for federal government agencies.

According to Borchelt, this led to the creation of a middle-of-the-road position. Here a federal officer—many times a former journalist—was in charge of putting out positive information about an agency while being careful to not violate the 1952 Act. This departure from impartial, objective reporting may be the clearest point where the positions of a journalist and a PIO may have diverged.

Finally, Borchelt explored what it currently means to be a PIO, and how that role relates to journalism. Borchelt made it clear that “there is no federal job category called public information officer. It’s a self-identification, a tribal identity, not a job description.”

Borchelt went on to define four aspects of this PIO tribal identity: PIOs don’t think that they are doing public relations, per se; they think they’re ultimately responsible to the public; they have considerable loyalty to their agency; They believe they are being helpful guides to agency information and resources, not roadblocks.

Borchelt pointed out that a journalist’s identity may share many of these features, and that these traits are likely conserved from the not-too-distant divergence of the two positions.

If the role of a journalist and a PIO are similar, then what could be leading to the conflict between these two positions? Borchelt addressed this by enumerating the constraints placed on a PIO at a federal agency. According to Borchelt, one of the first defining points occurred when President Reagan and his political leadership decided to silence all conversation about HIV and AIDs. To achieve this, federal agencies directed PIOs to restrict access to scientists and any related reports, including a moratorium on issuing press releases to journalists.

Bill Clinton would further bolster this approach to information control. His administration brought a fine-grained “message control” that subsequent administrations would continue to wield, Borchelt said. In fact, agencies would now typically make important communications decisions without consulting a PIO. Borchelt described these political constraints as a source of conflict between PIOs and journalists making requests of a federal agency. Despite having similar goals in an interaction, the PIO may simply be constrained from sharing certain information.

Borchelt concluded by recapping the idea of a common ancestry between journalists and those in a PIO position. He reiterated that the divergence of these roles has happened so recently that there is still considerable overlap in each party’s ultimate goals. And while this commonality may by obscured during individual interactions, an understanding of the PIO’s working constraints may help illuminate the two party’s collective interests. Borchelt raised the hope that recognizing this similarity may engender a greater sense of collegiality.

By Naomi Shavin

Moderator, DCSWA board member, and freelance writer and editor Mitch Waldrop began the afternoon break out session on narrative storytelling with an anecdote about boredom. The session, however, which featured Olivia Ambrogio, the manager of the Sharing Science program at the American Geophysical Union, and National Geographic contributing writer Yudhijit Bhattacharjee, was riveting.

“The power of narrative, the reason we want to use it, is because humans are built to hear stories,” said Waldrop in his opening remarks. “Our brains are designed to learn things via stories.”

Waldrop cited a Scientific American story by Maggie Koerth-Baker, which opens with a fascinating narrative about head trauma and chronic boredom. The opening of the piece serves as both a gripping, puzzling tale of injury, recovery, and its non-linear aftermath, and also as an origin story of how one researcher came to realize what he wanted to study.

According to Ambrogio, that’s pretty much the platonic ideal of what you can do as a science writer.

“One of the great things about the scientific endeavor is it fits into narrative themes,” Ambrogio said, providing examples. “Let’s talk about the journey or the quest. Often you have literal journeys, maybe they’re traveling to remote field sites, or even if they’re traveling to closer sites, hurricane chasing. There are the more metaphorical quests for acknowledgement or discovery.”

Ambrogio continued with another theme: mystery.

“What’s causing coral reef bleaching? How are these birds managing to navigate from one pole to another?” asked Ambrogio, citing writers like Primo Levy and Rachel Carson, who used mystery and fable, respectively, to draw readers into a story.

Yudhijit Bhattacharjee, whose work has been published in national magazines including the New Yorker and Wired, shared a couple of humorous, self-deprecating stories describing how he learned to write narratively—and occasionally failed to do so along the way. He shared background on how he reported out two successful stories, for Discover and for the New York Times Magazine.

“Science does not happen in a vacuum, it is a very human endeavor,” Bhattacharjee said. “Every person has a human story and that scientist has a human story.”

Overall, the most crucial takeaway from the panel was that stories are essential to good science journalism. Every scientist should be thinking about how to tell their own story, and every journalist should make sure to report out the narrative aspects of the story they’re working on.

So what can you do when you’re reporting a story and want to elevate it to a compelling narrative? Ambrogio suggested asking simple questions, such as how the subject decided to become a scientist.

“What makes a story different from a litany of events is that you have to have change,” Ambrogio added. “The protagonist, society, something has changed.”

Bhattacharjee advised patience and recommended asking questions multiple times over several interviews to get more nuanced responses.

“Time is your ally,” Bhattacharjee said. “It is the definition of insanity: you ask the same questions again and again expecting a different response, a deeper and more meaningful response.”

“You have to have a lot of patience and they have to have a lot of patience,” Waldrop agreed.

By Angela Trenkle

Sexual harassment is an issue that is found to be common in the sciences, but is not often discussed. To address this problem, DCSWA organized a session at their 2018 Professional Development Day that included a panel of four science journalists: April Simpson of Current, Andrea Widener of Chemical & Engineering News, and Meredith Wadman and Elizabeth Culotta, both from Science. Sara Reardon of Nature moderated the session.

These four panelists covered many aspects of sexual harassment in the sciences, while providing tips on what to do if you are covering a story that involves sexual harassment.

The panel began with each of the four journalists discussing their experiences covering sexual harassment in the sciences, including some incidents dating back 20 years. Next, the journalists talked about some of the more complex reasons why sexual harassment can be a difficult issue for the victim to come forward about, especially in the sciences. Finally, they talked about science journalism tips to use for when covering a story, then the panel took questions from the audience.

The panelists explained that many victims in the sciences keep silent because of one thing: a lack of power. The harasser, in many cases, is someone who tends to hold power over the victim. The harasser may also be in a position to enhance the victim’s career, whether by writing a letter of recommendation, acting as a mentor in graduate school, or leading a field excursion in a remote area.

With this background knowledge, if a science writer is covering a story in this area, it is important to ensure that the story is not only accurate, but is also approached in a way that the victim feels as though they are being heard and not accused.

Meredith Wadman provided some tips that are fairly easy to remember, but are important for science writers to know. First of all, it is important to build trust with the victims. Make sure to give them time and frame your questions as a curious requests, not an accusatory ones. Second, gather as much written documentation as possible. It could be as simple as a diary entry or a series of text messages, as long as it’s in writing. Finally, make sure to build time into the article publication schedule. It is safe to assume that the accuser will respond to the article and that lawyers will become involved at some point during the process.

Overall, the biggest take-home message from this session was the importance of continuing to fight for justice against sexual harassment in the sciences. By continuing to cover harassment in the sciences, using the journalism tips that the panel provided, science writers can do their part to ensure that this problem will not be tolerated by future generations.

By Kristen Childs

Satellite observations of objects in space do not arrive as the colored images that so often appear in science books and magazines. Instead, these visually captivating representations of space originate as data transmitted in long lines of ones and zeros—binary code that scientists can interpret and model in various ways to represent the structure and appearance of space phenomena.

At DCSWA’s 2018 Professional Development Day, Kim Arcand, visualization lead for NASA’s Chandra X-ray Observatory, explained how NASA experts are using Chandra observation data to tell stories about the high-energy universe. Her talk touched on the entire process, from the moment X-ray photons travel away from a high-energy interstellar object, such as an exploded star, to when the emissions reach the Chandra X-ray Observatory, and finally the data processing and creation of a scientifically accurate visual representation at the Chandra X-ray Center.

Chandra observations provide one of the best repositories from which to build stories about high-energy spatial objects and events and their changes over time. The telescope has been in operation since 1999, allowing the Center to model nearly twenty years of data.

Software is employed to scale reflectance values, remove artifacts, mosaic scenes together that were measured at different times, and apply a color scale to provide further meaning to Chandra observations. Since Chandra only observes X-rays, a type of electromagnetic emission that exists outside of the visible light spectrum, a chromatic color scheme is typically applied. Red, green, and blue color bands denote areas ranging from low to high energy, respectively.

Today’s advanced technology enables the simulation of observational data beyond traditional true- and false-color images. To gain a new perspective on the data and to make the findings more accessible to people of different learning methods and physical abilities, the Chandra X-ray Center is now representing space phenomena by generating 3-D computer models, creating physical models with a 3-D printer, and simulating observations using virtual reality.

What began as a project to build a 3-D model of the supernova remnant Cassiopeia A with software borrowed from brain imaging led to the development of tactile and multidimensional learning objects to model Chandra data. Printed 3-D models are especially beneficial for the visually impaired, as they provide a three-dimensional, physical representation of astronomical observations for people with limited to no visibility. Virtual reality with sonic input provides another avenue to experience and learn about space observations.

As with any data representation, the intended audience is a main consideration when Arcand and her team decide how to represent Chandra observation. A physicist might see a red and blue image and interpret the red areas as cooler than the blue, as is the norm in scientific representation. The first questions that often come to mind concern the source of the data, the technology used to collect and model it, and the size of the object. Only then might a scientific expert take a step back and appreciate the image for its aesthetic.

Non-experts often address these concerns in reverse. Their first reactions to an image of astronomical data tend to start with an expression of awe at the visually captivating phenomenon, followed later with more technical questions. Data representation consequently is more effective when the imagery is built to complement the thought process of the audience, Arcand said. To non-experts, astronomical data often appears as equal parts art and science. Treating it as such, by including captions or providing a familiar object such as the sun as a scale reference, can make data presentations both relevant and understandable.

Kim Arcand joined the Chandra team one year before launch. Twenty years later, her knowledge of data and audience interaction, as well as her extensive experience in data visualization, help her transform raw observation data into meaningful representations of space objects and phenomena. Key priorities when developing data visualization, such as considering the audience, creating a frame of reference, and establishing a sense of relevancy, are important for the Chandra mission. The same principles apply to any scientist or research organization looking to not only analyze and interpret data, but to tell captivating and informative stories that seek to explain the world—and the universe—around us.