[Editors] Why publicize science news, part II

[Elizabeth Thomson]

More insights on publicizing university research.....I especially  
agree with the first note, from A'ndrea at Penn State. I've had very  
similar experiences....

Elizabeth
================================
Elizabeth A. Thomson
Senior Science and Engineering Editor
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
News Office, Room 11-400
77 Massachusetts Ave.
Cambridge, MA  02139-4307
617-258-5402 (ph); 617-258-8762 (fax)
<thomson at mit.edu>

<http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/www>
================================

>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>> -
>>
>> Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 08:01:26 -0500
>> From: "A'ndrea Elyse Messer" <aem1 at psu.edu>
>> Subject: Re: NASW-PR: publicity and research funding
>>
>>> Well, by now nearly everything I had to say has been said, but  
>>> just to
>>> reiterate a few points and provide some fodder.
>>
>> If the guy becomes willing to do a press release, but still  
>> refuses to
>> speak with the press, forget it.  It does more harm than good to put
>> something out there and then have reporters unable to do  
>> interviews.  They
>> won't get a story and as you know, it leaves a bad taste in their  
>> mouths.
>>
>> as for convincing him.  I agree that if there is any public  
>> funding, either
>> federal or state, then undoubtedly there is a clause in their  
>> grant that
>> says they should do publicity.  NASA used to make it mandatory,  
>> they may
>> still.  NSF and NIH strongly encourage it.  And they do appreciate  
>> seeing
>> clips when it comese time to renew the grant or expand it.
>>
>> But more importantly, publicity does increase funding, and it  
>> increases
>> other benefits as well.
>>
>> I once, a long time ago in another life, saw a paper come across  
>> my desk
>> that had every earmark of a wonderful story.  It was about a  
>> device for the
>> deaf and blind so that they could manually read the deaf alphabet  
>> on a
>> computer controlled mechanical arm.  The work was done by  
>> students, for the
>> VA.  And the prototype, named Dexter, worked.  what more could  
>> someone ask
>> for a story.  So I called up the researcher who immediately told  
>> me, well,
>> yes, I'm presenting the paper, but we don't have any funding so I  
>> don't see
>> why you should bother.  I explained that it was a good story and I  
>> wanted
>> to do it and she said ok.
>>
>> The story was picked up in all media and worldwide.  It was a  
>> natural.
>>
>> Two years later going into an elevator at AAAS meeting, I ran into  
>> the
>> researcher who I had not met before (thankfully I could read her
>> badge).  She said, hey, you know that story.  Well, after it hit  
>> the papers
>> and TV, we submitted some more grants and now we have funding.   
>> While I
>> can't be certain the story caused this, she thought it did.
>>
>> Also, if the department is any kind of technology, materials,  
>> chemicals,
>> etc. publicity often brings interested collaborators, licensers,
>> purchasers, etc.  Nearly every time I write about some piece of  
>> equipment,
>> whether big or small,  we get industry people interested in using or
>> adapting it.  The same with processes.
>>
>> A'ndrea
>>
>>
>>
>> A'ndrea Elyse Messer
>> Science & Research Information Officer
>> Penn State
>> 814-865-9481
>> 814-865-9421
>> aem1 at psu.edu
>>
>> ********************************************************************* 
>> *****
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 08:13:34 -0500
>> From: Carol Morton <carol_morton at hms.harvard.edu>
>> Subject: Re: NASW-PR: publicity and research funding
>>
>> Steve makes a good point. A release does more than share information,
>> it signals availability to media. If this guy's not willing to talk,
>> I wouldn't do a news release (unless in those rare cases of
>> unavoidable news coverage and possibly misinterpretation, that a news
>> release is needed for a clear takehome message.
>>
>> - -Carol Morton
>>
>>> ******************************************************************** 
>>> ***
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 21:19:53 -0500
>>> From: Steve Bradt <bradt at pobox.upenn.edu>
>>> Subject: Re: NASW-PR: publicity and research funding
>>>
>>> That said, your guy sounds difficult enough that I would really be
>>> tempted to just write him off. Before I issue a news release, I look
>>  >for two elements: a newsworthy story and a scientist willing to  
>> tell
>>> that story to any and all comers. When you put someone out there
>>> before the public and they behave like a jerk, it doesn't reflect
>>> creditably on your institution -- or on the scientific profession,
>>> for that matter. What's more, reporters don't appreciate having
>>  >someone like that unleashed on them, no matter how compelling the
>>> research. To put it bluntly, if someone's not willing to play the
>>> game -- and that IS their prerogative -- I have 300 more  
>>> appreciative
>>> researchers with whom I could be working.
>> ********************************************************************* 
>> *****
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 09:30:42 -0500
>> From: "Bricker, David M" <brickerd at indiana.edu>
>> Subject: RE: NASW-PR: publicity and research funding
>>
>> Lee et alla,
>>
>> NASW-PR: the LISTSERV that never sleeps. What a great discussion.
>>
>> I've had this same, exact problem with one Indiana University  
>> department
>> chair. The main issue for him is time. Despite the many excellent
>> arguments made in this thread on behalf of the fruits of publicity,
>> professors who are behind on their grant writing or are jockeying for
>> tenure have a hard time justifying why they should spend time doing
>> publicity when other, seemingly more pressing matters await them.
>>
>> I've found openly acknowledging this academic push-and-tug helped me
>> make headway with The Difficult Department Chair (title of my
>> forthcoming opera -- replete with diva). If you can lay out your
>> publicity-is-good case while expressing an intimate understanding  
>> of the
>> chair's complex obligations, you should have success.
>>
>> We can only pray.
>>
>> David
>>
>>
>>
>> *******************
>> David M. Bricker
>> Media Relations
>> Indiana University
>> 530 E. Kirkwood Ave., Suite 201
>> Bloomington, IN 47405
>> Ph. 812-856-9035
>> Fx. 812-855-7002
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 10:13:59 -0500
>> From: "Alan Wachter" <awach at mycloudburst.net>
>> Subject: NASW-PR: publicity and research funding
>>
>> [snip]  I've had this same, exact problem with one Indiana University
>> department
>> chair. The main issue for him is time. Despite the many excellent
>> arguments made in this thread on behalf of the fruits of publicity,
>> professors who are behind on their grant writing or are jockeying for
>> tenure have a hard time justifying why they should spend time doing
>> publicity when other, seemingly more pressing matters await them.
>> David M. Bricker
>> *********
>> This is a surprise to me. My experience is with academics who want  
>> publicity
>> and hire ghost writers and they may be in the minority.  But every  
>> dept.
>> head I've worked with made sure they were co-authors of everything  
>> published
>> by scientists/physicians in their department and that they  
>> participated in
>> every press conference and media briefing.  Alan Wachter
>>
>> ********************************************************************* 
>> *****
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 11:02:13 -0500
>> From: "Tally, Steven W." <tally at purdue.edu>
>> Subject: RE: NASW-PR: RE: publicity and research funding
>>
>> This is a good discussion. Carol's response does a nice job of  
>> summing up,
>> but I'd like to add one thought of my own.
>>
>> Several years ago I wrote a piece for our internal faculty  
>> newspaper on why
>> scientists should work with the media. I interviewed David Philips  
>> about his
>> study and empirical findings, I interviewed a state legislator  
>> (we're a
>> state-funded institution), and I interviewed Leon Lederman, who was
>> president of AAAS at the time.
>>
>> I don't know that the piece changed any minds, but it seemed to  
>> reinforce
>> the efforts of the scientists who were talking with the media.
>>
>> For some time I've been wondering if NASW PIOs should do something
>> similar--as an article, brochure, website--that we could offer to  
>> scientists
>> who are sitting on the fence trying to decide whether to  
>> participate. We're
>> communicators. Can we communicate out of this box?
>>
>> Steve Tally
>> _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
>> Steve Tally
>> Senior Science & Technology Writer
>> Information Technology at Purdue (ITaP)
>> Purdue University
>> 765.494.9809
>>
>> - -----Original Message-----
>> From: Carol Cruzan Morton [mailto:carol_morton at hms.harvard.edu]
>> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 7:21 PM
>> To: nasw-pr at nasw.org
>> Subject: NASW-PR: RE: publicity and research funding
>>
>>
>> Hi Lee,
>>
>> Is self-interest a motivating factor for him?  The journals  
>> themselves want
>> to see their work in the news, and for better or worse often seems  
>> to be
>> one of the selection factors.
>>
>> His citation count might do the talking.  I don't have the  
>> reference on me,
>> but there was a study with a clever control about 10 years ago (UCSD,
>> David Philips?) that showed papers covered by media received more
>> citations.
>>
>> The study looked at research covered in the NYT over two periods,  
>> one of
>> which when it was being written but not distributed because the  
>> folks on
>> the loading dock or some such were on strike.  People have more  
>> time to
>> scan the NTY science section than the dozens of worthy journals  
>> piling up
>> on their desks every week.
>>
>> Problem is, that might inspire your problem person to talk only to  
>> the NYT.
>>
>> How about public accountability, if he's publicly funded?  How about
>> democracy, so people can make informed decisions about funding for
>> such work and other civic or private decisions based on such work,
>> depending on the nature of the research?
>>
>> Both the NSF and NIH strongly encourage people to share their  
>> research
>> with the public so appreciation and money will keep flowing into  
>> their
>> coffers in the annual budget cycle. Their public affairs and leaders,
>> especially NSF, are quite vocal about this.
>>
>> Joann Rodgers at JOhns Hopkins has an most excellent book on all  
>> this,
>> thin and still available, and perhaps some specific tips in past  
>> issues of
>> ScienceWriters online at nasw.org for dealing with different  
>> categories of
>> folks.
>>
>> Rick Borchelt at the Whitehead is also a good resource of data and
>> persuasive methods to bolster your case.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Carol Morton
>>
>
> -- 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> -------
> Elizabeth A. Thomson
> Assistant Director, Science & Engineering News
> Massachusetts Institute of Technology
> News Office, Room 11-400
> 77 Massachusetts Ave.
> Cambridge, MA  02139-4307
> 617-258-5402; <thomson at mit.edu>; 617-258-8762 (fax)
>
> <http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/www>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> -------

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/editors/attachments/20071217/7d557416/attachment.htm