AAAS 2010 in Review

Each year the AAAS annual meeting brings together scientists, science organizations, and journalists from all over the world. This year the meeting was in San Diego. It was rainy.

A few highlights of my trip were the many discussions of dolphins, doomsday scenarios, and conversations about the changing face of science communication.

It turns out that dolphins might be a great model species for studying type 2 diabetes. However, several other researchers suggest that dolphins should be given non-human person status, which would make that kind of research incredibly difficult. The only reason that people feel all warm and fuzzy about dolphins is that they have an intelligence that we can recognize as similar in some ways to our own. This led to think that human-like intelligence should not be a factor in determining conservation status for animals since intelligence is something we don’t even understand and have a hard time defining. We need to get over ourselves and our over-inflated sense of importance in the universe before tackling these issues.

Mathematicians are finding new ways to use their skills by working with social scientists and urban planners to figure out how to plan for the weird things people do on sidewalks, roads, and in buildings.

It was reinforced that scientists need to remember to keep the public in the loop when planning and executing potentially controversial experiments. Transparency is key to things like hadron colliders and geo-engineering. Keeping people in the dark only leads to greater mistrust and development of more conspiracy theories. So, go talk to the people, you scientists!

And, on that note I’ll end with some points about science communication.

Bloggers for the large part were not allowed press access to AAAS. This is because historically AAAS has only allowed journalists working for accredited organizations to attend. Now, many freelancers, like myself, get around this issue by joining writing organizations like NASW. So, for all you serious science bloggers who didn’t get to attend this year, or who are regularly denied access to professional meetings, until the media landscape changes and new media professionals are considered press in their own right, consider joining an organization that will give you that accredited status. That’s how you get into the parties with the free drinks!

Secondly, I was on a panel about empowering young scientists to help communicate science to the public. Several examples of what an organization called “Sense About Science” in the UK is doing in conjunction with “Voice of Young Science” were brought to light. There are lots of young scientists interested in helping to dispel myths related to science and health. We also discussed various aspects of what is wrong with science in the media these days as well as what is right with it. I expressed my view that new and social media are going to play an increasingly important role in getting science out to the public. Right now, although these online media forms do allow “echo-chambers” to form quite easily, they do allow exceptional access to information and distribution of ideas.

Finally, mass media is still slow to accept independent online media, and even resents its presence (for obvious reasons). However, science journalism can only benefit from people from all areas of the communication sphere working together. Mass media is shrinking, but it will not disappear, and independent media will continue to grow. Together they can make science communication even better.

Communication Basics

Today I co-led a media training session for scientists. The day went quite well, and I found it rewarding to be able to share my knowledge and experience with other scientists. I remember what it was like to learn about the media’s perspective on communicating science. It was so foreign to my science-trained brain, but understandable since it could be boiled down to one main point.

In communicating your work (whatever it might be) with anyone, you need to tell a story. To tell a story you need to be able to first draw in your audience, get them interested in what you have to say. Once you have them, you follow a story arc, feeding them supporting ideas and information to satisfy their interest. To tie it all up, you need a good ending that will leave the audience with a lasting impression.

In order to get someone’s attention, you should start by answering the question: “Why is this interesting or important?” Strangely enough, when you are immersed in the nuanced details of your work that is one of the questions that becomes the most difficult to answer. Think of the big picture and how the average person might be interested. What are the common human threads that can tie your work to something tangible?

The information that follows your story’s introduction needs to support that connection. Answering the question of “how” is fundamental here, but the story can’t get too bogged down in details at this point or you lose the interest of the audience. Think of the children’s story of the Three Little Pigs. When the big, bad wolf came to blow the house down all that you know about how he tried to do it was that “he huffed and he puffed.” You don’t need to know how many breaths he took or how large his lung volume was or whether or not he had asthmatic symptoms (although that might have changed the story a bit). The information given is enough to keep you engaged (”oh, man! He’s huffing and puffing!”) and wondering what will come next (”oh, man! IS he going to blow it down this time?”).

The story’s end is the place where you have your last chance to make an impression, if you haven’t already. I’ll continue with the Little Pigs example here, which ends with the wolf climbing on the third pig’s roof to get at the pig by way of the chimney. Instead falling down the chimney only to land in a pot of boiling water put there by the pig. The pig turns the tables on the wolf and end up eating him instead of the other way ’round. This ending leaves quite an impression, and ties up all the loose ends of the story (pig not eaten lives happily ever after, wolf is dead and can cause no further trouble).

In science, your ending can be a message you want people to hear or an action you want people to know about or do themselves. In either case, it helps to use strong words that elicit emotional responses that will make your message that much stronger.

There is lots more to communication than just the story, for sure. But, thinking about your work as a story to be told is a great place to start.