Tag Archives: nasw

Journalist compares U.K. science writers, American health reporters

When the Association of British Science Writers announced the nominees for their 2011 Science Writers’ Awards, Guardian science blogger Martin Robbins noted a familiar pattern.

Of the 12 places on the shortlists for science writing, 6 went to New Scientist, 1 each to Nature and the BMJ, and 1 each to the Guardian and the Independent The final two places went to a freelancer and the website SciDev.Net. That means that newspapers combined took just two spots, while specialist science publications took eight. Meanwhile, the TV shortlist was occupied by BBC 3, BBC 4, and BBC 2, while the radio shortlist featured BBC Radio 4, BBC Radio 4 again, and, yes, BBC Radio 4.

A lists of nominees from earlier in the decade reveals a similar pattern of “Near-dominance of broadcast science by the BBC, while specialist publications competing with a dwindling group of broadsheet newspapers for the literary prizes,” Robbins writes. To better understand this apparent one-sidedness, Robbins talked to ABSW chair Connie St. Louis, who suggested that U.K. newspapers have succumbed to a form of churnalism and “communication,” because they simply don’t have the resources for in-depth work like that which occurs at the BBC or the specialty outlets. Here’s St. Louis:

I have this thesis which is… science journalists have forgotten how to be journalists. They’re actually science communicators, and they go into the job and… the job was to tell you what science was doing and help you understand science, and I think that’s an incredibly important function, but don’t call yourself a science journalist if that’s what you’re doing, call yourself a science blogger, call yourself a science communicator, but if you’re going to call yourself a journalist then behave like a journalist, dig for stories, ask questions of science, ask questions of scientists, look at numbers, look at figures, and do what journalism does.

St. Louis then goes on to compare U.K. science journalism (somewhat unfavorably) to the relatively higher level of scrutiny faced by American health journalists, scrutiny brought about thanks in part to a few key thought leaders.

We’re always explaining new cures, explaining new science, but where are the guys who are really digging down, where are our Ivan Oranskys, where are our Gary Schweitzers [sic], we don’t have them. It’s all very much “here’s a new cancer drug”, and I’m not knocking that, it’s really important, but actually we’re in a very deficit model of journalism at the moment.


Mason wins NASW award for drug resistance series

AHCJ member and Associated Press reporter Margie Mason won the science reporting category of the National Association of Science Writers’ Science in Society awards for “When Drugs Stop Working,” a five-part series on drug resistance she wrote with Martha Mendoza. Charles Duhigg’s “Toxic Waters” series in The New York Times tied for the honor.

When Drugs Stop Working

MRSA project earns AHCJ member an award

The National Association of Science Writers awarded AHCJ member Michael Berens the Science in Society Journalism Award for his part in the November 2008 series “Culture of Resistance,” a tale of the spread of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) through Washington that Berens wrote with fellow Seattle Times reporter Ken Armstrong. Berens and Armstrong uses databases and public records to chronicle the resistant bacteria’s rapid spread.

The press release quoted a judge as praising their work thus: “Although we’re awarding for local coverage, I think this piece has also had a rather profound national impact as well.”