It’s not boring!

On average, Ukrainian readers of periodical mass media will be versed in political intrigue, the nation’s economic problems, or the domestic stars’ favorite fashion labels. However, they tend to be totally ignorant about the achievements and problems of science. There is hardly anyone who follows the recent interesting developments in international or Ukrainian science.

The media catering for a wide audience prefer the publications with a taste of sensation or scandal, the topics ranging from the future of mankind to apocalyptical forecasts to a panacea for all maladies. However, scribes do not care to write about the National Academy of Sciences and what the thousands of research associates are busy doing there, what they are developing, and what they can boast of.

They believe that this is what journals exist for, and that the broad reading audience will find such themes boring. Meanwhile, looking at the other nations’ experience one can see that popular science periodicals enjoy the attention of large numbers of readers. Glossy magazines, generously illustrated with photographs and diagrams, cultivate the interest in scientific discoveries in their readers. Their editors cannot complain about the lack of demand for such editions, either.

Daniel CHARLES, a science journalist from the USA, shared his vision of what science journalism is, what makes a good popular science magazine, and why Ukraine needs this type of periodicals.

Science is a complex topic, especially for the media, which have to popularize it and convey it to their audiences. However, this does not seem to intimidate American publishers.

“There are two kinds of science periodicals in the US. The first type is the specialized journals aimed exclusively at scholars, because for mass audiences such periodicals will be of no interest. The second one is the popular science editions for the broad reading public. These are luxurious glossy magazines, with big illustrations, photographs, and diagrams. They attract enough readers to be profitable. Some can be self-supporting even now (after the global economic crisis. – Author).

“For one, the Scientific American has been on for more than a century. And the British New Scientist can be either bought at newspaper stalls or through subscription. It is a big magazine with a circulation of 100,000 copies. Although it partly supports itself through advertisement, it is obvious that there would have been no advertisers without a broad reading audience. Such editions are not inexpensive, but people in the US can afford to spend money on them.

“However, I think that if such popular science magazines were published in Ukraine, they would enjoy demand here as well. Scholars must tell people about what they do, rather than just discuss matters in limited expert circles. It is us taxpayers who provide scholars’ salaries, in particular, those who work for the US National Academy of Sciences, and that’s why they have to report their achievements to us.”

Which Ukrainian science themes are most appealing to you as a journalist?

“At one time I had to prepare a set of materials on energy conservation methods in Ukraine, but the article was not really serious in tone. That was the time when the singer Ruslana was waging her campaign for energy independence, and there was much talk about the “green,” clean energy, but mostly in the context of music.

“On my recent visit to Ukraine I came across a couple of appealing topics which I am going to look into. In the US, we have vast areas of meadows and steppe which are known as prairies. They are gradually getting turned into arable lands. What interests me is how we can preserve the rest of virgin lands, together with their plant and animal life.

“You have a similar situation with your steppes and meadows. That is what my first research is going to be about. Besides, I’m interested in what is going on in your huge National Academy of Sciences. I plan to write about the most interesting research and conduct a couple of interviews.

“In the previous years, Ukraine mostly appeared in the US science press in the context of Chornobyl. The scholarly circles also know Ukraine to be a great agrarian country. After the collapse of the USSR, there has been a growing interest in the fate of the Ukrainian scientists who had been developing weapons, rockets, etc. and whether they have been recruited by Iraq by any chance?”

You work as a science journalist and at the same time give lectures in science journalism at college. What should science journalism be like?

“Any journalism which helps people find out about something new, like technology, processes, or how the Universe works, is science journalism. On the one hand, science journalists tell about innovations in science and technology, and on the other, they use this knowledge to explain certain routine, ordinary things which we are used to.

“A science journalist must write in an entertaining way. The material has to attract the readers. Humans are essentially curious creatures, and our task is to arouse this curiosity. When you use a certain tone to tell a story to your friends, they are all ears when they listen to you. The same applies to journalism.

“A journalist may fail to write an absorbing article about high-energy physics, but some succeed even in this. Everything depends on the author’s creativity. The boring science journalism is but a stereotype. In fact, it is interesting, and not only to scholars. It tells about what is going on around us, how it happens, and why.

“For example, you want to know if the climate of Earth is going to change. How can you find out? This is where science journalists come in. They have to speak with scholars and then make the material accessible to the broad public.

“As far as my activities are concerned, I was interested in two issues, and the results of my research into them were used to write my two books. The first is related to genetically engineered agricultural crops. The second is about Frietz Haber, a German chemist who lived in the 19th and 20th centuries. He initiated a mass production of fertilizers and at the same time took part in the development of chemical weapons during the First World War. This is a story about how science can serve the good and the evil and about why scholars serve this or the other side. It also makes up a subdivision of science journalism.

“Speaking of the topics which are interesting for the readers, in the US the most popular are those which are related to health: what is good for the human being, for the human system, various diets, vitamins, and the like.”

Are there themes in science on which a journalist simply cannot write in an entertaining and accessible key?

“I think there are. They pertain to the underlying laws of physics, on the subatomic level. I personally do not know how to convey these things in simple and easy terms. Such themes include, in my opinion, elements of astrophysics and the explanation of the origin of the Universe. They cannot be instantly comprehended. To explain them, journalists will often use metaphors.”

What about corruption in the American science journalism? The developers and manufacturers of medicines or, let’s say, new technologies must be interested in publicizing their achievements in a science magazine.

“The practice of journalists getting paid by those who they write about is absolutely out of the question. It is even more impossible with the magazines that have established a long-term reputation. Sometimes it happens that a journalist is persuaded that everything he or she hears is the ultimate truth. Then it turns out that it’s not the case.

“For example, a reporter addresses his question to several scholars who all say the same, but then it turns out that they work for one and the same company. To a point, companies try to ‘corrupt’ journalists by organizing presentations, offering to cover their travel expenses, accommodation, etc. But in the news organizations this kind of ‘cooperation’ is strictly forbidden.”

Speaking of this type of newsperson, do they have to be more of a scholar or more of a journalist?

“There are two ways you can become a science journalist. The first is traditional journalists beginning to write on scientific issues. This is how I found my way into this sphere. The second option is for scientists who take up journalism as an additional profession.

“However, there are two things a science journalist must always bear in mind. First, he or she must be a skeptic.

Scholars often disagree and always claim that their point of view is the only true one. Second, they always have to verify the information they were given, and find out why this phenomenon was explained in this particular way, and no other.”

COMMENTARY

Oleksii BONDAREV, editor, Department for Science and Technology, magazine Korrespondent:

“Keeping track of science news, we pick out only those materials which can prove interesting for a mass audience rather than a limited circle of readers. People are interested in themes which concern everyone: health, technological innovations, popular materials about the outer space, and ecology. They are read for the sake of getting better background knowledge.

“There are certain difficulties in covering the issues concerning Ukrainian science on our pages. First of all, due to a whole complex of reasons, one can hardly call the Ukrainian science a powerful one. Besides, it is quite specific. In many branches, the Ukrainian science does not appear at all. On the other hand, there are spheres where our scientists are highly valued, but they are very narrow and do not appeal to the mass audience.

“Second, the Ukrainian scholars do not know how to advertize their selling points. Often, journalists in this country simply have no opportunity to find out about the new discoveries. In other countries, scholars are more accessible to society and the press. Each university, each research center has its own website where they publish the recent developments. Many scholars have their own blogs. All this instantly gets circulated by the numerous English-speaking online media which write about science.

“Conversely, our scholars are in a kind of vacuum, i.e., the problem also concerns the absence of a connecting link between the scholars and the journalists. The popular science press does not exist in Ukraine, and this is a great disadvantage. However, I am optimistic that with time this niche will be filled.

“We can look at the Russian experience. The editions like Popular Mechanics are in demand there, and they are largely supported by advertisers. We had similar projects in this country, but they were hampered by the crisis and other problems. Nevertheless, I am confident that soon a competent investor will appear, who will put money in the creation of such a publication and will manage it wisely.”

The Day ’s FACT FILE

Daniel Charles is an American writer and radio journalist. He has authored a book about a Nobel Prize winner who opened the era of chemical fertilizers, Master Mind: The Rise And Fall of Fritz Haber, 2005, and another one, Lords of the Harvest: Biotech, Big Money, and the Future of Food, 2001.

In 1993 through 1999, Charles worked as a reporter for the National Public Radio, NPR, covering science issues. Occasionally, he will prepare materials for the NPR newsmagazine.

Charles writes on a large segment of advanced technologies including telecommunications, energy, agriculture, computer technologies, and biotech. He chose the history of technological development as his main theme, researching a wide range of issues starting from the origin of the bicycle to electronic networks to chemical insect repellents. He has worked on science materials from India, Russia, Mexico, and Europe.