The book Warren cites was facilitated by the Union of Concerned Scientists. More information is available here:
http://www.ucsusa.org/publications/scientist-media-guide.html It provides scientists with an alternative to "keeping mum" while reducing the chances of being misquoted in the media. People need to hear what scientists know and what they learn. It seems there is also a certain obligation to communicate findings to the public for those of us who get research funding from public sources. Communication with the media does carry with it certain risks, but as more and more scientists simply refuse to communicate, we take on exposure to an alternative set of risks (e.g., the larger effects of a lack of science in our public discourse). -Geoff Poole Warren W. Aney wrote: > If you are a scientist and you are going to be talking to the media, you > should first read "A Scientist's Guide to Talking With the Media" by Hayes > and Grossman (2006, Rutgers University Press). On page 77 this book talks > about reviewing copy before it is printed (sometimes you can and sometimes > you can't, but don't make it a precondition). > > Warren Aney > (503)246-8613 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of David M. Lawrence > Sent: Monday, 23 April, 2007 07:17 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Fwd: Global Warming Swindle > > > The take-home lesson is to be careful whom you talk to and be careful what > you say to them. Someone requests an interview, practice due diligence. If > you've never heard of them before, check them out. Make sure they are > legitimate journalists. Ask if they are members of organizations like the > National Association of Science Writers, the Society of Environmental > Journalists, the Society of Professional Journalists, etc. > > I work as both a journalist and a scientist. As a journalist, I would never > offer anyone such an agreement as proposed. As a scientist, I would never > request such an agreement. > > The role of the journalist is supposed to to be an independent voice -- a > skeptical filter for the public. Journalists are not supposed to be > mouthpieces for institutions, corporations, celebrities -- even scientists. > > I don't think any reputable scientist would want to give up intellectual > control over his research. Why would a scientist ask a journalist to give > up editorial control of his reporting? > > Dave > > ------------------------------------------------------ > David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 > 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 > Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > USA | http: http://fuzzo.com > ------------------------------------------------------ > > "We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo > > "No trespassing > 4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joseph gathman > Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 7:47 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Fwd: Global Warming Swindle > > <stuff snipped> > > On a different note, the lesson to learn from the > scientist who was misquoted seems to be: don't talk > to the media unless they give you, in writing, the > right of approval or rejection of what they do with > your words. Of course, they probably won't do that... > > Joe > >
