Comments for 5th World Conference of Science Journalists

Comment on Reporting science in emerging economies by Jia Hepeng

Jia Hepeng — Wed, 16 May 2007 23:58:26 +0000

I am posting my presentation here for further discussion–JIA Hepeng:
What does “emerging economy” mean in the field of science:
* Rapid S&T budget increases: China: from 1.3 per cent of GDP in 2005 to 2.5 per cent of GDP in 2020
*Rapid growth in scientific output: 150,000 S&T papers, ranked the world’s fourth, after US, UK and Japan, in 2005. In terms of citations, ranked the world’s 13th. (ISTIC 2006)
* The eagerness to keep up with the international (West) scientific level.
* The strong willingness to be acknowledged by the international community.
* The strong desire of not being neglected or excluded in the international dialogue/contexts of science development
* The rising self-awareness of maintaining an integrated (somewhat independent) science community.

Then the chances in “emerging economy” to cope with problems faced by science journalism:
1. Science or research-based companies in the emerging economies could sometimes be easier to make world-leading research because the desire to keep up with the West could bring looser regulation. Journalists can make good stories of them especially when they know the international situation of it as well as the international debate on the project. Although many emerging economy scientists are reluctant to talk with journalists in general, they are eager to cope with the international doubts and questions. This is the case of China’s gene therapy.

2. Additionally, in an immerging economy like China, there are many huge science projects. The projects themselves could be an important news source, as long as journalists take more independent views to observe and research them.
Within the big projects which cannot be questioned, many details could be picked up for discussion in the journalistic contexts, because this can create a signal that journalists are helping to improve the projects by making them in accord more with international practices.

3. The government influence is strong, but scientists become growingly reluctant to be oriented or dominated by studies which might not bring international excellence. Therefore, there are more chances to get individual scientists who could comment whether certain studies/programmes are international level or are in accordance with international norms.
scientists would not form an image unacceptable by international community. Therefore, as long as a journalist knows more about international norms and background, he or she can use this to encourage or activate the responses from scientists.

4. The strong government influence is the major reason for lacking meaningful and effective debate. But in an emerging economy, the social forces becomes stronger and more diversified. There will be chances to grasp this behind the seemingly peaceful picture of academia.

5. The situation for debate is especially true when in the international community, there are already debates on certain issues in the immerging economy, such as China’s huge water diversion project. A lot of the immerging economy scientists would not make their international counterparts feel that they are indifference to these internationally heated issues. But again, journalists need to protect their sources by using anonyms or other tricks.

Comment on Biasing scientific information by JIA Hepeng

JIA Hepeng — Wed, 16 May 2007 23:48:02 +0000

As a speaker of the session, I highly appreciate the theme and people’s interest in it. But personally, I think some information has not been stressed while others get expanded. I did say propaganda is a barrier to Chinese science journalism, but I wanted to disucss the theme futhur: Why, despite seemingly great support from the government to science journalism, it is still suffering a great regression. I think it is propaganda, together with the institutions set for this purpose, that have resulted in this situation. With a propaganda purpose, 1. most information flow is always single-way, lacking participation from readers; 2. a lot of information is always focused for the science community; 3. Always good news which has led some ads-style science news for commercial interests; 4. Science PIO only favours official news outlets which, without a strong market competition, are less likely to think for the public taste.
Although my presentation is focused on situation in China, I think this could be inspiring to other situations where science communication is done simply to boast scientific community and achievements.

Comment on New Media: podcasting, Second Life and the future of the Web by Michael L.

Michael L. — Sun, 13 May 2007 23:18:51 +0000

I attended this session. This is a good summary. I thought all the speakers were very good, though I would have liked to hear more about the different systems that can be used to run a website.

Comment on Let Us Know What You Thought by Axel Fischer

Axel Fischer — Fri, 11 May 2007 11:32:55 +0000

Yes, it was great! There are a couple more blogs and websites around that are connected to the conference. See e. g. the EUSJA Blog and the WCSJ page on TELI’s website (in German).

Greetings from Munich to everybody!

Axel Fischer

Comment on Let Us Know What You Thought by Mohammed Yahia

Mohammed Yahia — Sun, 06 May 2007 12:33:49 +0000

Niall and Sarah thank you soooo much for a most excellent conference! The conference was very well arranged and diverse and always interesting.

This is my first WCSJ and I absolutely loved the experience! I found it very useful on different levels for my work as science editor.

I also found Melbourne to be a fantastic city which I enjoyed very much. I hope I visit it once again to meet up with all the friendships made there.

Comment on You are not your brain scan: critical reporting on the mind sciences by CogSciLibrarian

CogSciLibrarian — Thu, 03 May 2007 20:38:26 +0000

The podcast was terrific!

Comment on You are not your brain scan: critical reporting on the mind sciences by admin

admin — Wed, 02 May 2007 20:11:43 +0000

This session was recorded by ABC Radio National for broadcast in their program about the mind, brain and behaviour: All in the Mind.

The podcast and transcript of the program can be found here:
http://abc.net.au/rn/allinthemind/