1. Provide the title of your story or series and the names of the journalists involved.
Th Nanotech Gamble, a three-part series with sidebars and charts by Andrew Schneider
2. List date(s) this work was published or aired.
All material went live on Mar. 24, 2010 and a different story was highlighted for each of the next four
3. Provide a brief synopsis of the story or stories, including any significant findings.
The title of the first story – Amid Nanotech's Dazzling Promise, Health Risks Grow – pretty much sums up the issues. The series focused on the fact that the government spends hundreds of millions to create new uses of this often amazing technology, but we did show that only a small fraction of the money went to researching the potential health hazards of the from human contact with the material. We also documented that many of the nanoparticles being sold commercially use nanoparticles that scientists – including from the government – have shown to be lethal.
4. Explain types of documents, data or Internet resources used. Were FOI or public records act requests required? How did this affect the work?
Documents were FOIAed from seven agencies that do or claim to do nano safety research. But five delivered nothing and three sent just a few documents. fewer than half the cases. Fortunately, people within the agencies provided a fw of the the needed databases and reports.
5. Explain types of human sources used.
People within U.S. and foreign governments, academia, industry, medical and legal community, congressional staff members, activists and inspectors and investigators on the front lines.
6. Results (if any).
Two House committee said they were going to look into the lack of meaningful government safety regulations on nano and were going to get to it when Congress returned. However, now that the House safety and oversight committees have republican chairs, I wouldn't hold your breath.
7. Follow-up (if any). Have you run a correction or clarification on the report or has anyone come forward to challenge its accuracy? If so, please explain.
No corrections were requested but we ran a long OP ED piece from the White House denouncing the conclusions we documented that not near enough effort and funds were expended on safety concerns.
8. Advice to other journalists planning a similar story or project.
Become completely conversant with the topic, the jargon, regulations, laws involved the issue and the leading experts in the field. Interview and examine parties and positions on both sides of the topic. A balance, especially on a controversial subject, must be presented. When possible make the extra effort to avoid unattributed quotes. Examine all the major civil and criminal litigation surrounding the topic and you will often find legal exhibits that the government or corporation refused to make available.