Lessons learned at the Age Boom Academy

By JoNel Aleccia
The (Spokane, Wash.) Spokesman-Review

Maybe you think we've got the aging beat covered. Health reporters, more than others, tend to gravitate to stories that star seniors, either by choice or necessity. Missed flu shots? Mismanaged nursing homes? The debacle of Medicare Part D? There's no shortage of older sources and their views.

And, with between 50 and 60 reporters at U.S. newspapers covering aging at least half time, some of us, it seems, are taking the topic very seriously.

So it might surprise you to learn that founders of a New York nonprofit organization don't think we're doing nearly enough. Oh, they were polite, but it was clear from the start of last month's Age Boom Academy seminar that organizers at the International Longevity Center ­- USA believe that most journalists are missing – or mucking up – some of the century's best stories.

How else to explain the relative lack of attention to news that U.S. life expectancy slipped from 11^th to 42^nd in world rankings, said Dr. Robert N. Butler, the Pulitzer Prize-winning gerontologist who founded the ILC.

How else to explain a mainstream narrative that often depicts aging and the aged as "pathetic and dreary," even when research contradicts that conclusion, said Laura Carstensen, director of the Stanford Center on Longevity.

And how else to explain most news agencies' relentless focus on wooing younger audiences when the world should be riveted on what to do with all those seniors? The numbers alone are testament: By 2030, more than 20 percent of the U.S. population will be older than 65, up from about 12 percent now. By 2018, people aged 65 and older will outnumber people 5 and younger for the first time in human history.

"We're in a position now with age where science writers were with global warming in the 1980s," said Jonathan Weiner, professor of science narrative at the Columbia School of Journalism.

Weiner was among the top scientists, academics and other experts who spent a week talking about trends in their fields, trying to persuade a dozen journalists from across the country to increase coverage of issues surrounding aging and longevity.

No question, they made it attractive. The nonprofit center, with its $3.5 million annual budget, got help from the Stanford center, the New York Times Company Foundation and the Ellison Medical Foundation to pay reporters' travel, lodging and meal expenses to hear the nonpartisan advocacy group's message.

But it was a message grounded in expertise and aimed at ensuring that more journalists understand the complex issues an aging world will be forced to confront.

Interspersed throughout the scientific discussions was some solid advice for reporters who covering aging, especially those who cover scientific research on aging and longevity. Here are some suggestions:

• Buck the stereotypes. Reporters and readers alike are vulnerable to the view that aging represents a steady decline in all abilities. That notion persists, sometimes even when research indicates otherwise, Laura Carstensen said. "Rarely do we hear that from 70 to 81, people remain cognitively stable," she noted. She urged reporters to scrutinize research carefully instead of accepting information that confirms pre-existing hunches.

• Understand the science. Before reporting on a compelling new research finding, read the whole study – not just the abstract, said S. Jay Olshansky, a professor in the School of Public Health at the University of Illinois. Make sure you understand how the study was constructed and conducted. Don't cherry-pick the sexiest conclusions, either. "In our field, the more ridiculous or outlandish (the topic), you're going to pick it up," he said. "Ask, 'What scientific evidence do you have to back up the claim you're making?'"

• Understand the magnitude of impact. Don't rely on a study's authors to convey the significance of the findings, said Edwin L. Carstensen, an emeritus professor of biomedical engineering at the University of Rochester. (And Laura Carstensen's father.) "There are many papers published based on a single experiment in a laboratory," he said. If you don't have experience analyzing scientific research, ask someone who does to evaluate the relevance of the work.

• Seek critical viewpoints. Researchers know their critics, Olshansky said. Ask them for the names of those who will disagree with the findings. Similarly, cultivate a panel of "touchstone" sources who can help put a study's findings in perspective, suggested Alice Dembner, the Boston Globe's medical reporter who attended the Age Boom Academy in 2002. Dembner also cautioned against overselling the positive results of studies.

• Try to work around the public relations staff. This surprising suggestion came from Laura Carstensen, who told reporters: "It's always better to know someone."

• Finally, consider carefully the anecdotal lede. It's tempting – but often too easy – to introduce complex scientific subjects with dramatic or heart-tugging vignettes. Avoid the urge, advised Dembner, who said her paper's hard-news emphasis prompts her to reserve anecdotal ledes for rare occasions, such as a narrative project on hip fractures. If you do start with an anecdote, understand why you're using it, suggested Weiner. "You want to make every anecdote work as many ways as possible: metaphorically, literally," he said. "You have to be so cunning about it. A good anecdote will convey the science, give you a transition and humanize it."

For more information about the Age Boom Academy or the International Longevity Center USA, visit www.ilcusa.org.

JoNel Aleccia is a health and medical reporter at The Spokesman-Review newspaper in Spokane, Wash. She has covered social issues, nonprofit agencies and health and medical issues for more than 20 years at newspapers in Oregon and Washington.