This is the first science journalism article I ever wrote. Unfortunately at age 25. I was briefly involved in newspaper and yearbook in middle school and high school, but these creative activities were looked down upon in terms of grade-point-average points. Off the top of my head, I suppose there are several mechanisms to consider when writing a science journal article: (1) zipping and unzipping code language such that many people can understand versus a select few of individuals can understand, (2) the intro hook to the article must be extremely catchy and attract the attention due to the reader's direct application and relation to the article topic itself, how science relates to and shapes our every day lives, (3) application of intense visual arts to correlate with the article, hence "The Matrix of the Mind: Mapping Language on Landscapes," (4) adding elements of public critiquing of scientific articles and science itself, because most scientists are reporters, not analyzers and critiquers. The public rarely sees this side of science journalism. Someone has to play skeptic with science, and (5) the importance of using multiple lines of evidence in order to construct a science journalism story, most particularly interviewing the scientist him- or her-self, and directly seeing their system of study with your own eyes. There are several layers of missing information in scientific articles that can be revealed in science journalism, most particularly the personality of the scientist (e.g. precisiologist, fuzziologist, fluffologist.... INTERNAL FACTORS) and how it influences his or her word choice, as well as several layers of bureaucratic and financial influence (EXTERNAL FACTORS) that have biased or distorted or skewed the byproducts of the scientific research.
No comments:
Post a Comment