We wanted this conference to improve the status of science journalism here in Australia, strengthen and grow an international network of science communicators and promote the rich diversity of Australian science.

I believe we succeeded.

However success is in the eye of the delegate, speaker and sponsor. So the pertinent question is: what did you think? If you have a comment please leave it below. If you’d prefer your comment to remain private you can instead use our contact form.

Again my thanks to our many sponsors, speakers, session producers, those who assisted the organisers both locally and from afar, and of course to you the delegates.

I hope you enjoyed the conference and our city. See you in London in 2009.

Niall Byrne
Conference Director

PRODUCER: Rada Rouse, Medical Observer
CHAIR: Pallab Ghosh, BBC (UK)
SPEAKERS: Gus Nossal, consultant, WHO and the Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation and Ian Frazer,UQ Director, Diamantina Institute for Cancer Immunology and Metabolic Medicine

“Vaccines buy you a lot of health for a small amount of money,” says renowned immunologist Sir Gustav Nossal.

Trouble is, there are still not enough dollars devoted to vaccine research and development, let alone to delivering products to countries where they matter most to counter the global burden of disease.

And it’s not just money or science that governs the place of vaccination in public health: emotion is a potent driver. Public support for vaccination ebbs and flows. Fear that polio vaccine is being used as a genocidal weapon has plunged vaccination programs into chaos in Nigeria and the Indian sub-continent. Fear that vaccines were causing an epidemic of autism led millions in the USA and UK to reject vaccination of their children.

The production and distribution of vaccines can also become mired in public relations battles, patent wars and politics.

This session will examine how science can be overwhelmed by other forces, and what may be in store in future.

Gus Nossal is a leading figure in immunology and has played a prominent international role in disease eradication through the World Health Organisation and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Ian Frazer is the co-inventor of the virus-like particles technology that underpins the world’s first vaccine against the human papilloma virus which causes cervical cancer.

Pallab Ghosh is science correspondent for BBC News and a member of the executive board of the World Federation of Science Journalists.

PRODUCER: Emma Young

CHAIR: Bob McDonald

SPEAKERS: Fiona Fox, Kim Griggs, Amy Forbes

SESSION REPORT: Get it onto page one

By Boonsri Dickinson

Bob McDonald, Quirks & Quarks (Canada) opened this fast-paced session by describing how making a story bigger doesn’t mean you have to sensationalize it. Describing how the hobbits story changed from a mere discovery of fossils found on the remote Indonesian island of Flores to scientific debate over if the fossils were really a new species of humans to a controversy over who owns the fossils. “Now that’s sensationalism. We are not talking about that today,” McDonald says.

When Fiona Fox, Science Media Centre (UK), was told that she had three years to land third-world debt on the front page, she made the story bigger by getting the church involved. After Fox had 20 catholic bishops play tug of war to symbolize debt, three major newspapers had third-world debt on the front page.

Fox’s five tips for making a story bigger:
1. Link to topical picture of the day – SARS or global warming
2. Speak out in numbers – use 5 institutions instead of 5 scientists
3. Be an opportunist – “Any sting ray experts, you had your moment.”
4. Take the journalist to the story – “Day trip to an exotic location, like this.”
5. Embrace celebrities.

Now, at Science Media Centre, Fox says getting Dengue Fever and Malaria on the front page is “just as difficult” as getting third-world debt in the paper.

Kim Griggs, freelance science writer in New Zealand, has to make stories bigger “to make a living.”

The green fat nocturnal parrot — Kakapo — sold well. In one trip, Griggs sold the Kakapo story to COSMOS magazine for a feature, to the BBC by interviewing UK volunteers, and to New Scientist for artificial insemination. Though the real reason to pursue stories like the Kakapo is to hold one of the six Kakapos in her hand, Griggs says.

Griggs gave out some handy advice: develop relationships with editors and exploit resources such as list serves. Most importantly, show your credentials by creating a Web site.

A journalism lecturer at Monash University, Amy Forbes, had her start as a science journalist in the Philippines. Forbes stated clearly that “science journalism is not a big thing in the Philippines,” where most newspapers have no dedicated science page.

Forbes described how early coverage of the possibility of Pinatubo erupting, months before it actually erupted, helped save at least 5,000 lives.

Forbes warned reporters to keep away from wacky science stories and instead to personalize stories. Forbes ends on a light notes, the Philippines are full of epidemics according to the media, but the country has something better — not all the stories are tragic.

During question and answer session, all the speakers agreed that as a journalist, you’ll have to do things that make you uncomfortable. The key to making a story bigger (in terms of longevity) — is a timely news hook. It’s a mystery why some headlines stay in the news for weeks, while a briefing on the AIDs vaccine will only be a one hit wonder.

Front-page news is not the only way to get the news out, try magazine features and documentaries. As for tips for dealing with skeptics — well, the media is “allergic to closing down debates.”

PRODUCER/CHAIR: Jacinta Miller,

SPEAKERS: Jaelea Skehan, Jane Pirkis, Steve Waldon

SESSION REPORT: Sensationalist or sensitive?

By Christine Dell’Amore

Suicides should appear in the media as a way to increase understanding of mental illness, but journalists should be cautious in how they portray them, experts said Thursday.

Several health organizations worldwide, including one in Australia, provide journalists with media guidelines for reporting on suicide and mental health.

The guidelines are mostly universal – for example, they suggest reporters avoid glamorizing suicide and describing the method of death in detail. (Giving details could encourage readers to replicate the method themselves, a phenomenon called “The Werther Effect.”)

Jane Pirkis of the University of Melbourne studies suicide coverage in the media. In 2000, she began a Media Monitoring Project, which reviewed all Australian TV, newspaper and radio reports for one year and retrieved 4,813 references to suicide.

Once she compared this to national suicide statistics, only 1 percent of suicides were reported in the media — a surprising find, Pirkis told a panel at the World Conference of Science Journalists in Melbourne.

On balance, most of the reporting was sensitive and accurate — for instance, the word suicide was not often used in the headline, and few reporters tried to interview the bereaved against their will. However, many of the stories could have been improved by mentioning suicides’ link to mental illness — depression is the No. 1 risk factor for suicide — and printing information on helplines at the bottom of the article.

Pirkis is now six months into a follow-up study, in which she hopes to find a correlation between reporting well on suicide and a reporter’s knowledge of the media guidelines. The guidelines are distributed to all Australian media outlets, but it’s unknown how many in the media actually refer to them.

For most Australians, the media is the only source of information on mental health and suicide, said Jaelea Skehan, program manager for the National Mindframe Media and Mental Health Project at the Hunter Institute of Mental Health.

The Australian Press Council has deemed suicide a matter of legitimate public interest — and so as long as suicide remains a front-page story, journalists must be careful in how they approach it, Skehan said.

Steve Waldron, a writer for “The Age,” ended the panel with an account of his personal experiences writing about the suicides of a friend and a co-worker. His stories brought up a dilemma over where media responsibility begins and ends, he said.

Although Waldron has won awards for his reporting on suicide, he still wondered if he was “trading in on other peoples’ grief.”

PRESENTERS: Cathy Sage, Don Alcock

PANELLISTS: Phil Batterham, Ward Rooney,

SESSION REPORT: Use the KISS principle

By Nguyen Dang Vu Long

Scientists who are important contributors to socio-economic development must become more familiar with high-level communication skills.

They need to concentrate on their research while promoting the relevance of their work to practical life.

More scientists should have their work published. They need journalism skills so they can write science stories using simple, well-structured language.

Alternatively, they should be equipped with necessary skills to work with media so their science work can be easily transmitted to the public via stories most appropriate to the nature of their science work.

A number of scientist associations publish newspapers that reflect, not only their voice, but also a comprehensive view of scientific activities worldwide.

Many scientists have gradually become science journalists in this way. Vietnam has many situations like that.

However, several scientists in general are still unable to communicate effectively with the press. They find it difficult to explain their work in terms that are simplistic enough for journalists to quickly understand. They tend to use complex language that is difficult to understand. The result? The story is quite complex or even wrong.

Other scientists provide too much unnecessary information, which confuses the issue and the journalists reporting the story.

Nguyen Dang Vu Long
Reporter
Vietnam Investment Review
175 Nguyen Thai Hoc St, Hanoi
Tel: 84-4 845 0537
Fax: 84-4 823 5281
Mobile: 091 354 3169
E-mail: longndv@yahoo.com

CHAIR: Toss Gascoigne

PRESENTER: Barbie Drillsma

PANEL: Kathryn O’Hara, Julie Martineau, Fida Aljundi, Gervais Mbarga, Jenni Metcalfe

SESSION REPORT: Build your own network army

By Ochieng’ Ogodo

Forming science journalist associations is an important aspect of science journalism, but it requires conforming to some basics.

“The first step is to discover how many potential members you can attract,” said Barbara Drillsman from the Association of British Science Writers.

She said that it’s also important to stress that the association’s intention is to improve standards and to promote a network of science communicators, in case some people think you are forming a body that may be more demanding.

“It’s important to have large numbers. There is strength in numbers. Press clubs, if they exist, could also be used.”

Another important thing is fixing the first meeting after enough interest has been generated. “This can be a formal event or an informal gathering.” At this meeting it is key to discus what members expect from their own science journalist association — for example, sharing knowledge, the support of fellow members or even the possibility of taking part in larger international meetings.

It is also important to appoint officials at the first meeting. And it’s essential to be able to fund the association. “Right from the start you will need some money — even if it is only to pay for advertisements. If you do not have any, seek funding,” she said.

A constitution that lays down the rules and regulations controlling how the association will be run has to be put down. “It is easy to be bogged down when preparing a constitution but keep it as short and simple as possible.”

From the start, she said, it is important to keep strict financial records. “Nobody is willing to invest in, or support, an organisation which is not completely open about its accounts.” Often, you must establish just how much funding you will need to support the first years’ operation before launching the association.

When starting, she pointed out, it is crucial to let members get used to the idea of a subscription that will enable the association to run its basic functions.

According to Tim Louhgeed, President of Canadian Science Writers Association, association events should be sociable. “Make it a very social affair, like having parties during weekends and speaking science in a manner that doesn’t make feel like it’s a job.”

Lougheed said it is also important to have events that profile the organisation the way it wants to be seen. “For us, an award was the best way to go. But we now want to set up scholarships for young people,” he said.

According to Nadia El-Awady from the Arab Science Journalist Association, combining associations offers an invaluable opportunity for different associations to work together, especially for the young ones.

She said a lot of scientific knowledge is coming out each day and networking was one of the best ways of keeping in touch with what’s happening in other parts of world.

Ochieng’ Ogodo, a Nairobi based journalist whose works have been published in various parts of the world, is the chairman of the Kenya Environment and Science Journalists Association (Kensja). He can be reached at ochiengogodo@yahoo.com

CHAIR: Stephen Pincock

SPEAKERS: Gerard Milburn, Howard Burton, Raymond Laflamme, Andrew White

SESSION REPORT: THE REVOLUTION’S HERE!

by Raphaëlle Derome

Having trouble writing about quantum computing in a simple way? Well, keep working on it, because the quantum revolution is happening, and it’s here to stay, said experts at this session.

At the heart of this revolution is the concept that information is a physical entity, explained Howard Burton, Executive Director of the Perimeter Institute (Canada). “Information has to be stored somewhere, so it has to deal with the basic underlying laws of reality, laws which are different from the classical mechanics that govern the computers of today.”

One useful application of quantum information technology is the secure transmission of information. Thanks to quantum cryptography (also called quantum key distribution), no one can eavesdrop on your transmission without leaving a footprint. “Companies from Geneva, New York and Paris already have quantum cryptography systems on the market,” said University of Queensland professor Gerard Milburn.

Powerful quantum computers will take longer to develop — maybe 10 or 20 years. “For the moment, we can control about 10 quantum bits,” said Raymond Laflamme. Quantum bits (qubits) are the fundamental units of a quantum computer — equivalent to the transistors in today’s computers. “Around 40 or 50 qubits, classical computers will not be able to follow quantum computers anymore.”

Until then, which milestones should journalists look for while covering the quantum quest?

Long-range teleportation, for one. American scientists have already succeeded in emitting a single photon and detecting it from a distance of nearly 150 km… all in broad daylight. “Over the next few years, there will be attempts at transmitting a photon from ground to satellite and back,” predicted Andrew White. The military is especially keen on this because successful transmission would hold the promise for long-range, 100 percent secure communications.

Improved lab devices, such as single-photon light-sources or better light detectors, will give better control of quantum systems.

As for the rest, scientists cannot predict for sure what the current quantum revolution will bring. But they are eager to find out.

raphaelle.derome@gmail.com

PRODUCER: Craig Cormick

CHAIR: Fiona Fox

SPEAKERS: Mark Burgman, Lydia Buchtmann, Pallab Ghosh, Rosemary Robbins

SESSION REPORT: Progress: It’s a risky business

By Wu Chong

Food safety, nuclear power and chemical pollution… We live in a risk society where the hazards of scientific and technological progress step into highlight.

And in the public perception of risks, institutional context is important, according to a Melbourne scholar, who spoke at “Risky business — perception of risk,” on Thursday.

Rosemary Robbins, a researcher at University of Melbourne, said nuclear power scores highest in all risks in people’s psychological assessment. Food safety also scores high, she said.

Robbins said people always perceive nuclear power and chemical pollution as institutional failures in controlling risks. And when they perceive technological development, they question things such as, who is benefiting and how does it impact farmers and developing countries.

“We live in a risk society where modernization risks present qualitatively different dilemma,” Robbins said.

Genetically modified (GM) food is an example. “The issue is driven by sub-politics,” she said. “Even experts disagree with each other. We don’t know who we should trust.”

Lydia Buchtmann, a senior employee with Food Standards Australia New Zealand agrees that GM food is an actual risk. “It has continued to be a problem,” she said.

Other risks that are easy to ignore involve the so-called scientists who obtained their PhD degrees from unauthorised backgrounds, she said.

But she emphasized that no action is actually risk free. The difference is whether the risk is acceptable or not. “There are perceived risks from consumers and actual risks,” she said.

For example, consumers always worry that diseases in beef would pass on to humans, or pesticide residues are accumulated on fruit and vegetables.

Also, media play a role of shaping the public perception of risks, according to Mark Burgman from the Australian Center of Excellence for Risk Analysis.

PRODUCER: Chee Chee Leung

CHAIR: Robin Marantz Henig

SPEAKERS: Geoff Carr, Mal Washer, Janet Salisbury, Peter Mountford

SESSION REPORT: Stem cell research: The debate rages

by Robert Frederick

From Plato’s Euthyphro to UNESCO’s Universal Ethics Project, ethicists have failed to define a universal ethic. Unsurprisingly, today’s discussion on the ethics of stem cells would have suffered that same fate. That’s because the controversy itself is not universal, as one Korean delegate stood to say.

But the task of the Stem cells and bioethics session was not to define a universal ethic for how to use stem cells, it was to describe the controversy surrounding their use. And that controversy in some countries — described by panelists as “Western” or “Christian-founded” countries — made for a lively discussion as moderated by U.S. freelancer Robin Marantz Henig.

U.K. businessman Peter Mountford of Stem Cell Sciences argued for open policies that allowed as many scientists as possible to pursue the nascent science because scientists are still “trying to understand what’s normal” among stem cells.

Medical doctor and Member of the Australian Parliament Mal Washer pushed back against Henig’s concern that swapping terms was important. He said that changing from “embryonic stem cell” to “blastocyst” this late in the discussion, for example, would cost him dearly in constituents’ trust, a democratic politician’s most important currency.

Janet Salisbury, doctor of cell biology and founder of Australia’s Biotext consulting firm, stressed that journalists should not assume ignorance of one’s audience or interviewees about the underlying science. “People do inform themselves very well,” she cautioned, even of highly technical matters.

And The Economist’s U.K. science editor Geoff Carr summarized advice for science journalists that all panelists agreed to: arguing the benefits of stem-cell research “is a surrogate for a different [ethical] argument.” Carr urged the audience of about one hundred delegates not to make that substitution, or allow others to do so, but focus on the ethical issues themselves.

PRODUCER: Cathy Reade

CHAIR: Rosemary Okello-Orlale

SPEAKERS: Annmaree O’Keeffe, Jacqueline Ashby, Subbiah Arunachalam

SESSION REPORT: Empowering rural women farmers with science—key to achieving food security

by Imelda V. Abano

In many parts of the world, it is the women who are responsible for food security, yet rural women farmers have little access to the benefits of research and innovation, said Jacqueline Ashby, a development sociologist and presently the Director of the Rural Innovation Institute at the Center for Tropical Agriculture in Colombia.

Professor Ashby said that 80 percent of the world’s 1.2 billion poor depend on agriculture for their survival and that rural women in developing countries play critical roles in guaranteeing food security and well-being for the entire community.

“Empowering women in most developing countries with science is key to achieving food security. We should communicate with them on what new plant varieties and new technology is being developed in order for them to improve their crop production,” Prof. Ashby said.

To help the rural women farmers in the developing countries, Prof. Ashby said that a new strategy is now being introduced — the participatory plant breeding (PPB).

PPB has been proposed as a way to address three problems of conventional plant breeding, namely its low effectiveness in marginal environments, the long time needed to develop a variety and the poor level of adoption, particularly in developing countries.

“Although it is difficult to introduce this new technology to women farmers in the developing countries we are determined to help them and so we partner with several organizations,” she said.

There are currently more than 80 programs worldwide using PPB in a number of different countries and crops. These countries are in Syria, Jordan, Eritrea and Egypt on barley, durum wheat, bread wheat, lentil and chickpea. The first varieties identified through PPB are already in farmers’ fields in Syria, Egypt, Eritrea and Yemen. Other countries such as Jordan and Eritrea are increasingly using PPB as their national breeding strategy.

PRODUCER: Richard Jefferson

SESSION REPORT: Thinking positively patents

By Graeme Stemp-Morlock

Everything is patented, especially in the life sciences. It seems every time an institution finds a gene it immediately patents it and sells it to some company. But, this is incredibly problematic for those people who need this technology but can’t afford it.

Richard Jefferson has an idea of how to do away with patents, or at least create a sort of open source biotechnology. “A patent is a device to deny access,” said Jefferson. “You disclose your information and in return the state allows you to monopolize that information for a certain number of years.”

Jefferson believes that this system is not only outdated, but costing the health and lives of millions who can’t benefit from this knowledge. So, he suggests patenting everything.

Say what?

That’s right, he suggests patenting everything, but instead of demanding money for the use of your patent you demand a code of behavior. So, group B uses the information from group A that has a patent dictating behavior. In return, group B must allow group C, D, E, or whoever to use the information they discover from using group A’s patent. In other words, all the information becomes open access much like open access computer software.

This system would work exceedingly well if one gets around the most basic level of biotechnology, the use of the Agrobacterium for gene transfer. By using an alternate method of transfer everything discovered in this method could become open source.

In total this would mean that not only would biotechnology be available to the masses who don’t have the resources to afford the tools, but it becomes a lot more profitable. “Biotechnology is a really good way to lose your money because it has the wrong focus,” said Jefferson. “It should be focused on the building not the tools.”

If Jefferson has his way, public institutions will start patenting their discoveries with codes of behaviors, then the tools could be used by any and all and biotechnology might really achieve the promise we all dream of.

CHAIR: Alison Leigh

SPEAKERS: Tata Padma, Jia Hepeng, Nalaka Gunawardene, Christina Scott, Talet Ng’andwe, Luisa Massarani

SESSION REPORT: Emerging economies face different challenges

by: Aleem Ahmed

Lack of capable science journalists, communication gap between media and scientists, restrictions on reporting against the “official” opinion of the state, lesser-qualified public relations officers at S&T organizations, enormity of imported themes having little or no relevance with the society, non-existence of science-dedicated news services at local level, reluctance in media to report science, and the dearth of government interest to disseminate the scientific knowledge among the masses were the most common problems that science journalists from developing countries highlighted in this session.

Emphasizing the need for local-language science journalism, Christina Scott from South Africa revealed that there are 11 popular science magazines in her country. Among them, only one – having the smallest circulation – is in English, while the others are published in local languages.

Luisa Massarani from Brazil, who also coordinates SciDev.Net in Latin America, pointed to a huge communication gap between science journalists and scientists/ PR officials in the region: if a journalist contacts them to have their opinion regarding some S&T-related issues, generally they don’t respond. She also complained about the lack of and quality of public relations officers at R&D institutions and universities. For her, a small number of news agencies (like EurekAlert, AlphaGalileo and press.nature.com) are yet another problem that a Latin American science journalist has to face.

Voicing similar concerns, Talent Ng’andwe, a science journalist associated with SciDev.Net from Zambia, said the media in his country is free to report anything, except the opinions challenging the official viewpoint of the government – irrespective of their scientific and technical credibility. Additionally, Zambian newspapers consider political news items as the only qualifiers for the front page. And, if published, S&T-related reports find the least prominent place at the inner pages of these newspapers.

But for Nalaka Gunawardene, CEO, TVE Asia Pacific, Sri Lanka, the “immature demand for science” is an important obstacle in his country. For him, government’s unwillingness to enhance public understanding of science, arrogant attitude of concerned officials towards science reporting (using the brutal logic of with-us-or-without-us), and the sacredness of expensive ‘charismatic mega-science’ projects are the core problems that Sri Lankan science journalists are still to overcome. In other words, the lethal combination of nationalism and charismatic mega-science paralyses the real investigative science journalism in Sri Lanka. But, in the face of all these difficulties, “science (journalism) happens,” he said.

Despite making news in recent years, the overall picture of science journalism in India “isn’t completely rosy,” said Tata Padma, SciDev.Net’s South Asia coordinator from India. She noted that the science reporting in Indian media accounts for merely 3 percent of the overall coverage – heading to decrease further. Though the coverage of some scientific issues is increasing and a few investigative reports on science are getting published, the circumstances for science journalism aren’t as favorable as presented before the world. For example, there is no science-dedicated TV channel from India; most of the old Indian magazines of science are now closed while the officials are, generally, of the opinion that no one needs to know science. Like other developing countries, PR officers usually avoid media and there is no organized news service for science in India. More enthusiastic science journalists are needed to change this scenario, but the circumstances discourage new people to report science in the media.

For Jia Hepeng, regional coordinator of SciDev.Net in China, his country is facing a dilemma: China has greatly increased the spending on R&D in science and technology during recent years, yet has paid very little attention to the public communication of science – portraying a scenario almost identical to the other developing countries. But, additionally, Hepeng also suggested that science journalists might help improve the quality of science reporting in local media – by providing them with detailed coverage. He also stressed non English-speaking science journalists to improve their English-language skills, so that they can have a better international recognition.

During the discussion, various journalists from the other developing countries shared similar experiences and criticized their respective governments regarding the neglect of science journalism. Besides this, Nalaka Gunawardene observed a disparity or “non-equity” between science journalists from North and South. That is, an equally competent and capable science journalist of the developing world can only become an assistant for the (documentary-making) projects undertaken by the organizations from the developed nations. Answering a question from the audience, Christina Scott termed science magazines of the developing countries as “extremophiles” because they manage to survive in the most hostile conditions of their societies.

Finally, this plenary session ended with more voices of concern – rather than discussing the realistic, on the ground and practical strategies for the survival of science journalism in developing countries. Hopefully, during the next World Conference of Science Journalists, the WFSJ shall devote a session to discuss the survival strategies for the science journalism in the developing countries.

A two course sit-down lunch presented by the Australian Science Media Centre and theSouth Australian Government

The challenges that face society at local and global scales make it abundantly clear that knowledge of science and technology is no longer a luxury. It is a necessity. How do we build a more proactive scientifically literate society? It’s time for science to come in from the cold.

In this stimulating lunch dialogue, Professor Tim Flannery, Australian of the Year will address this challenge. He will be joined by the Hon. Paul Caica MP, Minister for Science and Information Economy, South Australia, who will outline aunique strategy based on the ideas from Baroness Professor Susan Greenfield’s time as ‘Adelaide Thinker in Residence’.

Board and Science Advisory Panel members from the first of these ideas, the Australian Science Media Centre, will join journalists for this event. Chaired by the Director of the London-based Science Media Centre, Fiona Fox.

PRODUCER: Toss Gascoigne

SPEAKERS: Michael Hartmann, Fiona Poletti, Kathy Williams

SESSION REPORT: Progress: It’s all in the telling

By Graeme Stemp-Morlock

In a very active discussion at this ASC workshop, delegates heard how to urge political action, information science could really use.

The most important thing is preparation according to Fiona Poletti, a former ministerial staffer and lobbyist. “If you’re in the minister’s door, they will know who you are, what your issue is and how long you can talk, so make sure you know what you’re doing there.”

Michael Hartmann, a lobbyist with the Cooperative Research Centres (CRC), Association convinced delegates that politicians were just people. “Don’t be intimidated,” said Michael, “they get dressed in the morning too.” Hartmann also suggested, “the reason politicians got into the job in the first place is they want to help people – it’s definitely not for the money.”

The panel also discussed how to get politicians to an event. Be sure to get the appropriate politician, alert them well beforehand,
organise events around the parliamentary schedule or their appointments if possible, and be prepared for plans to change.

Kathy Williams, general manager of Bunker Freight Lines and deputy chair of the Collections Council of Australia, suggested inviting both the appropriate minister and the shadow minister. “If you invite someone from the government and the opposition, it keeps them on their toes, and they are sure to be there.”

There were many other helpful tips, below is a selection of hints:

• Leave something behind. For example, a brochure on your organization and the proposed policy or program.

• “Be aware that sometimes you get a politician on a bad hair day,” said Williams. “Thank them for their time, and come back on another
• day.”

• Use the media, but don’t blab private conversations to reporters or the minister might never want to see you again.

• “Spend time with the backbenchers, especially if they are noisy in the party room,” said Hartmann. “Remember backbenchers eventually
• become ministers or even prime ministers.”

• Hope for a 15-30 minute discussion in their office, but be prepared for a 2 minute talk as they run to a meeting.

• Take a “real” person with you, eg. from the industry or group you represent. But, keep the number of people in the meeting down to 2-4.

• Don’t tell facts and figures. Tell stories.

PRODUCER: Tom Noble

CHAIR: Peter Calamai

SPEAKERS: Deborah Smith, Garry Linnell, Peter Fray

SESSION REPORT: Science does sell

By Laura Garcia Oviedo

Convincing media editors to give more space to science stories is difficult but not impossible. That was the main idea expressed during this session.

Debora Smith, who works at the Sydney Morning Herald newspaper, said science writers must use many strategies to be sure that their science story gets into the newspapaper.

“You have to sell it well, and make it as simple and interesting as possible to common people without trivialazing the story”, said Smith.

And she added: “Journalists try every time to get to the page one. Some stories are so interesting that they cross the line and reach the page one without problems, but other stories don’t”.

A good strategy to convince editors that a story deserves a space, said Smith, is getting good photographs, and graphics.

Mariko Takahashi, science news editor of the Asahi Shimbun Japanese newspaper, pointed out that are basic elements in a newspaper story. For example, it must include a date, it must have a big influence on society, it must surprise people, it must be interesting and it must be easy to understand.

But science stories present some problems, said Takahashi. It is difficult to find an exact date of a scientific discovery. Although some news is sometimes surprising to scientists is not always surprising to people. And headlines don’t always contribute to a good understanding of the story.

To avoid these problems he advised: to use the date when a paper is published or a speech is delivered, to point out the impact on society and to implement a writing style that gives surprise to readers.

Toronto Star journalist, Peter Calamai, chaired this session. He concluded: “If editors are good journalists, and they have the same values as you as a journalist, they are going to be able to recognize a good story”.

PRODUCER: Michelle Riedlinger

CHAIR: Bernie Hobbs,

SPEAKERS: Peter Cook, Doug Holden, Ian Lowe, Wang Yu

SESSION REPORT: Leading edge technologies maximize coal efficiency

By Jia Hepeng

More efficient use of coal, using new technologies, provides cheaper energy and reduces carbon dioxide emissions, according to the panel discussion at this session.

Peter Cook, head of CO2 Cooperative Research Centre of Australia predicts that the world’s use of coal will continue to grow, to 10.5 billion tons in 2030, despite its dwindling share in the world energy market.

He said, “The future of coal depends on costs, capacity, cleaner technologies and the availability of new energy sources.”

Increased coal consumption is thought to be a major contributor to increased carbon dioxide — global warming. As Australia faces increasing pressure, internationally and domestically, to cut carbon emissions, the call to reduce coal consumption and production has been growing.

However, Cook notes, studies show that a 50 percent increase in coal burning efficiency delivers up to three percent reduction of carbon emission per unit of coal consumption. With more new technologies, which dramatically increase coal efficiency, coal can “continue to be a reliable, securable, sustainable and clean energy.”

Australia’s heavy reliance on coal is shared by other countries, particularly China.
Wang Yu, a Chinese energy journalist from Beijing-based China Daily, revealed that in 2006, China produced 2 billion tons of coal, with two thirds of this used for electricity generation. In the near future, it is unlikely to reduce the world’s economic powerhouse’s reliance on coal.

While welcoming researches on cleaner coal, Ian Lowe, president of the Australian Conservation Foundation, complained that too many resources have been given to the sector, while research and development funding for sustainable energy is too small.

Lowe refutes the saying that Australians rely on coal for their jobs, saying the renewable clean technologies, such as growing plant for biofuels, are more labour intensive and hence the shift from fossil fuels to renewable energies will not result in lost jobs.

PRESENTER: Chris Del Mar
SESSION REPORT: Medicine breakthroughs: The Clayton’s Promise

By Andreas von Bubnoff

Why is it that medical studies that are widely reported in the media sometimes later turn out to be wrong? One reason is that there are many different designs of medical studies, which means that the quality of the evidence is different as well.

In this workshop on Controversies in evidence-based medicine, Chris Del Mar, Dean of Health Sciences and Medicine at Bond University in Queensland, used many examples to explain how different study designs affect the reliability of medical studies.

For example, he said, a randomized controlled clinical trial found that beta-carotene can increase the risk for cardio-vascular disease. The trial overturned the results of previous observational studies, most of which had suggested a benefit of beta-carotene in the diet.

Randomized clinical trials, or RCTs, are more reliable than observational studies, because they get rid of certain biases such as differences between people who choose to eat beta-carotene from people who don’t. Such people may be different in ways other than taking beta-carotene.

One useful source of information on RCTs, Del Mar said, is the so-called Cochrane Collaboration, which pools the results of several clinical trials.

The results of such pooling of trials can sometimes even change clinical practice, he said. “I am amazed that you guys haven’t tapped into that much more,” he said. “There is more information on RCTs in there than in any other database in the world.” Unfortunately, he added, free access to the data is only available in some countries where governments are paying for a national subscription such as in Australia, but not in others such most of the U.S.

Del Mar also explained when a study is considered statistically significant. He said that even statistically significant results can sometimes be meaningless if the effect is below the clinically important threshold.

PRODUCER/CHAIR: Jenni Metcalfe

SPEAKERS: Tim Flannery, Asa Wahlquist, Mike Young, Mike Rann

SESSION REPORT: Is Australia running out of water?

By Imelda V. Abano

Water in Australia is emerging as a scarce commodity, fueled by population pressures, intensive irrigation and erratic weather patterns brought on by global warming.

Addressing science journalists at this session, climate change expert and author Tim Flannery said Australia’s drought was part of a global dry spell that threatened the planet’s future.

“While water shortage is a global phenomenon not just in Australia, the present drought had already put huge strain on river systems,” Flannery said adding that scientists have found a 10 to 15 percent decrease in rainfall over a 50 year period.

He warned that climate change will likely make things worse for water resource management in the Murray-Darling Basin. “The water that’s available for us to use is declining because of this warming trend.”

The Murray-Darling Basin is one of Australia’s foremost river systems responsible for irrigating the country’s crops. Australia is faced with water scarcity in the Murray-Darling Basin as a result of diverting large quantities of water for use in agriculture.

University of Adelaide Professor Mike Young said managing water supply is the biggest climate-change adaptation facing Australia.

“We need to build mechanisms that make people aware of the value of water and to cope with these changes,” Prof. Young said.

Prof. Young said there is an urgent need for “well-designed urban and rural water allocation: and trading systems that offer ways of ensuring that this system will be effective.

“We need to work-out with the government and talk to the community about this problem,” he said.

On the other hand, South Australia’s premier, Mike Rann said the issue of water has been paramount. He suggested a need to introduce legislation next year and adaptation with the prevailing issue of water in Australia.

“What we’re seeing with this drought is a frightening glimpse of the future with global warming,” Rann said.

PRODUCER/CHAIR: Paul Willis

SPEAKERS: Deborah Smith, Chris Turney, Bert Roberts

SESSION REPORT: The Hobbit saga continues

by Piyaporn Wongruang

A new round of excavations in the so-called Hobbit cave will be resumed in the hope that it will end the lasting controversies in the human evolution scientist community.

Dr Chris Turney, a scientist from Australia’s University of Wollongong, said excavation will resume between June and July at the Indonesian cave where they originally found the remains of the new species of modern human Homo florensiensis, now dubbed the Hobbit because of its dwarf-like characteristics.

Dr Turney joined his colleague, Dr Richard Roberts, and the Sydney Morning Herald’s science editor Deborah Smith in this session, Uncovering the Hobbit

In 2003 the team first discovered the remains of skeletons and skulls, which were relatively contemporary — around 18,000 years old up to nearly 100,000 years — and relatively smaller, when compared to other designated remains including Homo erectus and Neanderthals.

The first set of remains was discovered in Liang Bua Cave on Flores Island of Indonesia. The team believed that it was a woman about a meter tall in height.

A few years later, the species drew much criticism, or verbal bombarding, from some scientists in the field, and even from those once worked on the same team. They claimed this species had some disorder that made their skull relatively small. Therefore it was not a new species. Dr. Turney is working on carbon dating these remains.

“It would be lovely to find another example. If there was another complete skeleton, it would help demonstrate that, yes, this is a new species,” said Dr Turney, acknowledging that such the skeleton was rare.

Depending on available funding, the team plans to go deeper into the back of the cave where they have already found piles of bones that have not yet been identified.

Collaborating researchers have also been working on different sites including the Western side of the island and Sulawesi.

SPEAKERS: Tony McMichael, Alistair Woodward

SESSION REPORT: Climate change has far-reaching ramifications

by Piyaporn Wongruang

Former U.S. vice president Al Gore climbed over an elevator in one of the scenes featured in his recent Oscar Award documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth” to demonstrate how high the carbon dioxide greenhouse gas would rise in the sky, if the current emission course remained unchanged.

The elevator lifted him up to about three stories.

“An Inconvenient Truth” generated unprecedented discussion about climate issues worldwide. But some scientific reports about the subject are still very difficult to promote.

While people worldwide have been awed by the scenes of fierce storms, and such, the impact of climate change on people’s health apparently still lies in scientific reports, which are still in the hands of the scientists.

Dr. Tony McMichael, review editor for the Human Health chapter of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s working group II said, the climate change focus is still very much on political and economic aspects.

“But we also know that public health is at risk,” he said.

An example of this was the heat waves in Europe during 2003, when death tolls increased to 900 when the temperature rose above the normal average daily temperature by about 12 degree Celsius.

Secondary impacts on people’s health, include increased injuries from extreme events, and the rise of infectious diseases and malnutrition, especially among the world’s
poor, Dr McMichael added.

Dr. Neville Nicholls, a lead author about climate change, said although reports could establish initial relationships between climate change and public
health, more knowledge is needed to help people better address these impacts and come up with adaptation measures.

He said people could start to act now. Take the case of Australia, which has attempted to mitigate impacts of heat-waves, which could become problematic to its senior citizens.

“We already know that people died because of them, and even though it may have not been from climate change, it’s still good to develop adaptation measures,” said Dr Nicholls, adding that adaptation could go in hand with mitigation.

Dr. Mongkol Na Songkla, Thailand’s Public Health Minister, said Thailand monitors the changing trends of some tropical diseases as a pro-active measure against climate change.

Recently, the ministry detected a surge in Malaria in the western part of the country, although its relation has not yet been linked to the change in weather patterns.

Apart from tropical diseases, Thais have also been encountering hotter and wetter weather, he said.

“The most significant thing for us to do is to equip our
people with adequate knowledge about climate change so that they can adapt themselves to the changing climate. Apart from this, our ministry will try to closely watch changes in disease trends, which may be related to the changing weather,” said Dr. Mongkol.

Health benefits will also help compensate the cost of mitigating climate change in the future.

Global concentration of greenhouse gases, mainly carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide have increased markedly as a result of human activity since 1750, and now far exceed pre-industrial values.

The increase of carbon dioxide is due primarily to fossil fuel use and land use change, while that of methane is primarily due to agriculture.

These have caused the total global temperature to increase up to 0.76 Celcius.

Eastern parts of North and South American northern Europe and northern and central Asia during 1900 to 2005 observed increased precipitation, while the Sahel, the Mediterranean, southern Africa, and parts of southern Asia observed drying condition.

More intense and longer droughts have been observed over wider areas since 1970s, particularly in the tropics and subtropics.

Both past and future human carbon dioxide emissions will continue to contribute to warming and sea level rise for more than a millennium.

PRODUCER: Melissa Trudinger

CHAIR: Alan Finkel

SPEAKERS: Rebecca Wilson, Clive Cookson, Simon Grose

SESSION REPORT: Let the buyer beware, let the consumer be wary

By Catherine Beehag

The divide between reporting science and reporting about technology-based businesses, was the focus of the discussion forum chaired by Dr Allan Finkel entrepreuner and executive publisher of Luna media.

Panellists included Clive Cookson, science editor of the Financial Times; Rebecca Wilson, consultant to the private and public sector at Buchan Communications; David Blake, publisher of Bioshares (a weekly biotech stock report); and Simon Grose, freelance writer/editor for the S&T and ICT sectors.

Science-based business, particularly private and public biotech companies, often produce media releases in quantity rather than quality, says Cookson. Journalists at this discussion raised the point that reporting within tight deadlines and embargos makes it difficult to fully investigate the credibility of company claims, risking public embarrassment and story inaccuracies.

Cookson said it’s important to put the science in media releases into context and to put a dollar figure on the updates.

Journalists must “explain the science and not mislead the public” Wilson said.

Blake claimed he loved how electronic media has opened pathways and communication avenues meaning journalists are “no longer restrained by one source.” This improves credibility to those who use it. He also mentioned that Australians love magazines and there are plenty out there which cover everyone’s interests.

Grose highlighted the need for journalists to check on what is produced in media releases. For example, he warned against reporting on living cell technologies when the technology was not ready to be used on human trials.

He said the proverb, “Let the buyer beware, let the consumer be wary” should still be used.

PRODUCER: Barbie McKaige,
SPEAKERS: Ross Bradstock, Dick Williams, Kevin Hennessy, Garry Cook, Peter Christophersen, John Schauble

CHAIR: Derek Guille

PANEL: Kevin O’Loughlin

SESSION REPORT: Burn, baby, burn

By Brendan Borrell

As that 40-foot wall of fire closes in on your uninsured home, it’s important to remind yourself that wildfires have been humanity’s erstwhile companion on the ecological landscape for thousands of years.

In this session, a panel of scientists outlined some of the benefits of that friendship and strategies for living with fire in the 21st century.

“Bushfires are not necessarily ecological disasters,” said Ross Bradstock of University of Wollongong, “In fact fires in these environments may be determinants of diversity.”

Aboriginal peoples, for instance, have long used fires to clear choking vegetation from savannahs and wetlands, which increases plant diversity and, consequently, populations of game animals. Sadly, much of that traditional knowledge has been forgotten, but Peter Christophersen of CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems related his work restoring such practices to aboriginal communities in and around Kakadu National Park.

Dick Williams, also at CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, further discussed the role of traditional knowledge in a prescribed burn program in Northern Australia. Bushfires account for half of Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions and as the climate grows hotter and drier, finding ways to manage — though not extinguish — natural wildfires is going to be more crucial.

In spite of these benefits, suburban dwellers may still be leery of welcoming wildfire into their neighborhoods. But John Schauble of the Country Fire Authority dispelled some myths about wildfire, including that nightmarish image of a wall of flame inching up on our homes.

Ninety percent of homes catch fire due to ember attack, he said and the “chance of being killed by bushfires is statistically very slight.” What this means is that in most cases, it is quite easy to stay and defend your home from fire provided you’ve had some basic training. He added the most dangerous thing you can do is evacuate at the last minute.

Whether we like it or not, fires are here to stay, the scientists agreed. Let’s try and make friends.

PRODUCER: Peter Calamai, Sandra Zicus,

CHAIR: Veronika Meduna

SPEAKERS: Louis Fortier, Kathy Conlan, David Hik, Steve Rintoul, Patti Virtue, Michael Stoddard

SESSION REPORT: Now is not the time for complanency

By Julia Hind

Our planet is changing, a leading Arctic scientist warned this week.

Speaking at the Wednesday morning session, Louis Fortier, Professor at the Université Laval in Canada, called for governments to have the political will to cut carbon dioxide emissions.

“If we don’t do anything now, this trend could be catastrophic,” he said.

Professor Fortier described some of the changes already observed in the Arctic including the reduction of summer ice cover. He said there has been a 30 per cent drop in summer Arctic ice cover in the past 30 years, with the greatest changes observed since the 1990s. He added that the evidence suggests the rate of melt was accelerating.

“Things are changing. There is an assault on the ice from the atmosphere but also from an increase influx of water from the Atlantic Ocean into the Arctic Ocean”. He believes predictions that the Arctic could be free of ice in the summer by 2015 were a possibility. This in turn, he said, would have enormous effects on animals and people, as well as raising major geopolitical questions.

But it is not just in the Arctic where the effects of climate change are becoming apparent. The meeting also heard from Stephen Rintoul, a scientist with CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, who described the crucial role played by the Southern Ocean in transporting heat around the globe and in absorbing carbon dioxide.

He said studies show the Southern Ocean is also changing with water at the bottom less saline and less dense than 30 years ago. This change in salinity and density could affect the water’s ability to sink and subsequently slow the ocean circulation.

The recently launched International Polar Year will give scientists an opportunity to study the Southern Ocean in a way they have not before. Scientists from 18 nations are taking part in a project to observe the ocean simultaneously from different locations, as well as in the winter and from under the ice.

CHAIR: Wilson da Silva

SPEAKERS: Kevin Hennessy, Geoff Love, Ian Lowe

PANEL: Chris Mooney, Simon Torok

SESSION REPORT: Climate Change in Ocean and how the media balance the reporting

By Xuxiuhua (from www.people.com.cn,China)

Climate change is now a hot topic to governments and scientists in developed and developing countries.

But it seems we pay too much attention to the land and not enough attention to the ocean.

At this session, Steve Rintoul, a scientist from CSIRO Marine & Southern Ocean Studies, says that since 1955, 84 percent of “global warming” is found in the ocean. So it stands to reason that the ocean, especially the ocean in polar regions, plays a critical role in climate change.

Polar regions can regulate the amount of CO2 — the main greenhouse gas which can cause global warming — being absorbed by the oceans. And new evidence shows that ice sheets are more dynamic than we thought before. Analysis of satellite data and tide-gauge observation indicates that the rate of sea-level rise has been increasing.

However there is another opinion. Some scientists consider that if you study the history of climate change criteria, the climate change we are enduring now is normal. The question is should the media present both sides of the argument to the public?

2nd SESSION REPORT: REPORTING CLIMATE CHANGE: THE DEVELOPING WORLD PERSPECTIVE

Presentation by Ochieng’ Ogodo

No doubt, communities need information on climate change. Good reporting on climate change is becoming increasingly important, especially for the developing world that has fragile economies and the vulnerable poor.

More and more, our lives are getting affected by the ever changing and unpredictable weather conditions. The developing world need to think about climate change, consider its impact on the environment, and deal with the problem. The community needs well informed science journalists who can report accurately and impartially on the impact of science on the society and across the world yet the subject is hardly covered by media in the South.

Throughout the 1990s, the media in the developing world was at the forefront of reporting on the devastation brought by the ‘El Niño’ rains, and bringing the issue of global climate change - and its impact on the local economy - into sharp focus.

The extensive coverage provided farmers and rural communities with a scientific explanation for the dramatic weather changes that they had been witnessing in recent years.

But while such high-profile occurrences captured the public imagination and generated intense debates on the impacts of environmental degradation on people’s day-to-day lives, the momentum generated was not sustained.

The topic of climate change that has captured the attention of the world for almost a decade 2000s, especially the developed nations, though they are culpable as major contributors to global warming, is not getting adequate attention in the media in the south.

The media has continued to focus on the ‘big’ stories such as deaths from drought, or the destruction caused by floods, with little information being provided on how to cope with the effects of climate-related changes.

Climate change is a relatively new concept within African media. Few journalists - or even editors, who are the gatekeepers of stories that go on air or into print - have a clear grasp of the science behind this phenomenon. On many occasions, science-oriented stories, as well as those covering forestry, agriculture, and climate change, get ‘spiked’. Publishers prefer stories about crime, violence and political scandal because this is what ‘sells.’

Yet above all, what farmers and rural communities require for mitigating and adapting to the effects of climate change, is access to information.

Farmers need to know whether the changing circumstances in which they grow their plants or raise their animals is merely a question of variability or a permanent change to weather patterns. Communities across the south also need channels through which they can share information on strategies that have worked well for them, and to adapt such techniques to their own circumstances, whenever possible.

Beyond sharing practical experiences, civil society organizations in the South need to discuss how best to exploit international support available through such instruments as the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), while continuing to debate amongst ourselves whether these approaches to emissions reductions are in their best interest.

The media - television, radio, print and online - naturally have a vital role to play in such debates, and yet there is a dearth of coverage of science issues in the developing world. A recent survey by the London-based NGO, Panos, of 47 journalists and from Jamaica, Zambia, Honduras and Sri Lanka found considerable frustration amongst media professionals, with what they felt was a severe lack of interest by editors.

Media owners are often concerned about short-term profits and may be unwilling to criticize industry, or offend advertisers. As many of the media houses operate on shoestring budgets, they often do not have adequate resources to undertake thorough investigation of climate-related stories.

Illiteracy too can be an obstacle to awareness, although the creation of online image banks of photographs and diagrams could help to convey the impacts of various facets of science.

There is also a need to build bridges between scientists and journalists. Scientists are often unwilling to simplify their research findings for a lay audience, so journalists have to sharpen their skills to simplify jargon heavy scientific content and make the subject more relevant and easier to understand.

We journalists too can do much to help ourselves. We can set up networks in order to share information. The Caribbean Environmental Reporters Network (CERN) and the Kenya Environment and Science Journalists Association (KENSJA) are good examples.

We also need to build bridges between the developed and developing environmental and science journalists so that we can exchange ideas and information.

Lack of pulling together-everyone with a stake in this problem - journalists, editors and publishers, NGOs, policy makers and funders, and of course the people of the developing world – are not pulling together to fill this grievous information gap. We need to do that.

PRODUCER: Louise Goggin

CHAIR: Peter Pockley, Australasian Science

SPEAKERS: John (Charlie) Veron, Daniel Gschwind, Paul Marshall

SESSION REPORT: Take your head out of the sand

By John Bohannon

“How much time do we have left?” This was one of the hard questions asked at this session. John Veron, coral reef scientist replied: “I’d say we have 10 years at most.” in which we must curb greenhouse emissions to avert disaster.

Although the Great Barrier Reef, the world’s largest biological structure, is in remarkably good shape, compared with other reefs around the world, action is required now.

Veron stressed that the key issue for coral reefs will be ocean acidification. As atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration rises, the pH of the ocean drops. Low pH makes it difficult for corals to build their limestone skeletons. This will make coral reefs fragile so that they would crumble in heavy seas and severe storms. Such reefs would no longer provide habitat for the myriads of animals that depend on them including fish, and lead to mass extinctions.

The amount of carbon dioxide already in the atmosphere due to human activities may be “committing the earth to destruction,” said Veron.

Daniel Gschwind from the Queensland Tourism Industry Council says that tourism operators are working to be part of the solution. The tourism industry is taking part in discussions and fostering stewardship of the reef.

The tourism industry in Australia is worth about $5 billion per year, and employs about 50,000 people —leaving aside the vital ecosystem services it provides.

Paul Marshall, from the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, urged that “rather than reaching for the bottle of valium,” we must take the practical steps that are possible right now. Even if climate change cannot be averted, the “resilience” of the reef can be bolstered by removing stresses such as pollution and overfishing. The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park was recently re-zoned using the best science possible, which increased protected (or ‘no-take’) areas from less than 5% to about 33%. This is also helping to build the Reef’s resilience.

Doing so is a moral imperative, said Marshall, because taking action now can mean the difference between complete disaster and a slow but steady recovery in the coming centuries.

PRODUCER: Ruth Armstrong

CHAIR: Fiona Fox

SPEAKERS: David Vaux, David Henry, Martin Van Der Weyden

PANEL: Chris Del Mar, Julie Robotham, Ruth O’Halloran

SESSION REPORT: Lost in translation

By Andreas von Bubnoff

The problem is well known: Often reports in the media on medical studies are misleading or even wrong. Whose fault is it and what can be done about it?

Both scientists and journalists are to blame, according to the panelists of this session.

Martin Van Der Weyden, editor of the Medical Journal of Australia, said that media reports often don’t mention conflicts of interest of experts they quote and that they often report research from scientific meetings that later never gets published. “You have to take this all with a grain of salt,” Van Der Weyden said. “There has to be skepticism.”

To address such problems, David Henry, professor of clinical pharmacology at the University of Newcastle, and others have created an Australian Web site called media doctor (www.mediadoctor.org.au).

The site uses ten criteria to assess medical reports in the media. The criteria include whether an article mentions the costs and harms of a treatment, or whether it mentions the kind of evidence used for claims made in a study. Many published articles don’t satisfy these criteria, Henry said.

But journalists are only a part of the problem. David Vaux of La Trobe University said that scientific papers often leave out or don’t explain error bars, which makes it impossible to know the quality of the data. Other times images are digitally manipulated, sometimes so much that the data is changed.

Julie Robotham, medical editor of the Sydney Morning Herald claims that mistakes in newspapers are unavoidable, given budget cuts and the time constraints to put out apaper every day. “You have to be realistic,” she said, “it’s only a newspaper. The next day you throw it out. You will hopefully get it right next time.”

Van Der Weyden said scientific journals take such errors very seriously. More than half of the proceedings of the last meeting of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors in Sydney, he said, was devoted to scientific misconduct.

PRODUCER: Julian Cribb

CHAIR: Brad Collis

SPEAKERS: Jack Ng, Ravi Naidu, Stevan Green

SESSION REPORT: This way to “zero waste”

By Christine Dell ‘Amore

The cocktail of chemicals that are the byproducts of a modernizing world pose an increasing public health burden to people.

Exposure to environmental contaminants such as arsenic, mercury and persistent organic pollutants (POPs), cause a range of health problems, from diabetes to cancer, while degrading Earth’s sensitive ecosystems. There are about 10 million contaminated sites around the world and 100,000 in Australia.

Tackling the problem means first determining a “dose-response”– or how much exposure to a chemical causes an effect, said Jack Ng of the Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) for Contamination, Assessment and Remediation of the Environment in Queensland. He was speaking at World Conference of Science Journalists briefing in Melbourne.

The CRC is developing a rapid response biological or chemical test to assess risk to potentially harmful exposure, which can be used real-time in the field.

“This represents a huge opportunity (for an organization such as ours) to develop methodologies to not only better quantify the risk but to remediate — to turn a waste site into a useful site,” Ng said.

For instance, many waste sites can be cleaned up and restored to residential neighborhoods or parkland. In Australia, the responsibility of clean-up is not mandated by government legislation, as in the United States, said Ng, and companies mostly fund clean-up efforts.

Remediation can also be approached through a sustainable prism, for example by reducing industry’s reliance on carbon dioxide, said Stevan Green, CEO of the CRC for Sustainable Resource Processing.

The polluted “red mud” from bauxite mining, for instance, can be neutralized by carbon dioxide from fertilizer. The carbon dioxide, a potent greenhouse gas, is then trapped in the less-toxic mud — a win-win situation, said Green.

Still, to really discern the interactions and health impacts of just 25 chemicals, 33 million experiments at $100,000 each would cost 3 trillion dollars — a staggering challenge for toxicologists, Ng said.

PRODUCER: Veronique Morin, Alana Mitchell

CHAIR: Kathryn O’Hara

SPEAKERS: Pallab Ghosh, Phil Campbell, Geoff McFadden, Leigh Dayton

SESSION REPORT: Embargoed “till when?”

By Brendan Borrell

“The relationship between [science journalists] and the journals defines the way the rest of the world views science,” said Pallab Ghosh from the BBC.

He criticized journalists who pay undue reverence to scientific journals and let themselves be “spoon-fed readymade copy,” provided by the journal press releases.

He felt that the embargo system used by high profile journals like Science and Nature made journalists lazy and allowed a few powerful journals to dominate the media.

Ghosh directed several good-natured barbs towards fellow panelist Phil Campbell, editor-in-chief at Nature, who took the podium next to defend embargoes.

Campbell explained that Nature’s policy doesn’t prevent scientists from discussing their findings at conferences or posting papers on preprint servers, and journalists are free to report “process” stories. However, if the coverage is focused on an upcoming article then scientists must limit their conversations to journalists who will respect the embargo.

He said that recent criticisms of the embargo system really reflect problems in the newsroom; if anything, the embargo system helps more science get into newspapers.

Panelist Leigh Dayton of The Australian agreed: “If I say this journal Nature has a fascinating story on life on Mars, Venus, Mercury . . . then I have chance of getting a few paragraphs in the back of the paper.”

Perhaps the most insightful perspective came from the only scientist on the panel, Geoff McFadden of the University of Melbourne. McFadden studies malaria and described the “bizarre experience” of being bombarded with interviews in the days leading up to its publication in Nature in 1996. “Two days later, the story was done,” he said.

Research that had been completed over the course of two years was in and out of the headlines in a matter of days. That’s news.