Hello all.


I like to think that I do communication and not PR, but I do sometimes wonder if that’s just me practising PR on myself given the not-so-rosy reputation of PR (‘the dark side’ etc) relative to good ol’ unbiased communication. I hope that if I found myself working for an organisation whose messages stuck in my craw, I’d leave. Either: a) I’ve never been in that position, or b) I’ve convinced myself that I agree with the messages. I think it’s the former, but self-perception is notoriously unreliable to say the least.




From: Jenni Metcalfe [mailto:jenni@econnect.com.au]
Sent: Wednesday, 10 July 2013 6:17 PM
To: Joanne Finlay; Sarah Keenihan
Cc: asc-list@lists.asc.asn.au
Subject: Re: [ASC-list] further to recent list conversations


Well said Joanne! My thoughts exactly.


I would certainly hope none of my writing as a journalist or communicator – depending on what hat I am wearing and I do wear both – is biased in any particular way.


I’m not about spinning anything, which is why I like to think I do journalism or communication and not PR.


Hmm bet there’s some thoughts on that!




Jenni Metcalfe

Director, Econnect Communication


phone: 07 3846 7111; 0408 551 866


skype: jenni.metcalfe

twitter: @JenniMet

PO Box 734 South Brisbane Q 4101

subscribe to Econnect's free monthly e-newsletter: http://www.econnect.com.au/news_newsletter.htm


twitter_16  facebook_16 


From: asc-list-bounces@lists.asc.asn.au [mailto:asc-list-bounces@lists.asc.asn.au] On Behalf Of Joanne Finlay
Sent: Tuesday, 9 July 2013 9:48 PM
To: Sarah Keenihan
Cc: asc-list@lists.asc.asn.au
Subject: Re: [ASC-list] further to recent list conversations


Hi Sarah


I think the questions you raise are really important. 


I am curious though about your presumption that writing as a communicator for a science institutions requires taking a 'somewhat biased' position.


Can one person effectively swap from writing as a journalist (for example, for a newspaper) to writing as a communicator (for example, for a science institution)?
                        i.e. is switching from relatively unbiased to somewhat biased writing a comfortable transition?


I have always taken the view that science communicators can and should honestly and accurately report the science, no matter who we work for. The hard part is in ensuring the institution or spokesperson you are writing for doesn't claim more credit for the science than is their due. In my view it is possible to do this, and although difficult not impossible to keep all parties happy. That's where being ethical as a science communicator comes in.


All sounds like good ASC conference fodder.




Jo Finlay

Journalist, writer and science communicator


On 08/07/2013, at 4:03 PM, Sarah Keenihan wrote:


Dear fellow members of the Australian Science Communicators,

Like Lynn and Bianca, I too am very interested in considering perpectives on science journalism and science communication, and how the two interrelate.

It interests me on a personal level because I’m trying to work out where I fit along the science writing continuum. However of course there are also bigger implications. Implications for:

            • How we (the people who talk about science) define our goals;

            • How we, governments and consumers make decisions about who pays for communication and journalism content;

            • How the public interprets material with a scientific flavour; and

            • Whether this material has the desired or indeed any impact.


I’ve written a few blog posts in recent weeks trying to get my brain around aspects of this. (If you’re interested, it started with Journalism is dead?, then progressed to Journalism versus communication and finally resulted in this duo: Profile of a science journalist and Profile of a science communicator. Of course my descriptions are not perfect – please add comments if you feel so inspired).

Whilst I’ve found the process of writing these posts helpful in clarifying my own thoughts, of course now I have more questions.

What I’m really interested in is the intersection of the two specialities, communication and journalism. Here are some issues which plague me:

            • In writing and reading job definitions or descriptions, how can one distinguish between a ‘science journalist’ and a ‘science communicator’?

            • Can one person effectively swap from writing as a journalist (for example, for a newspaper) to writing as a communicator (for example, for a science institution)?
                        i.e. is switching from relatively unbiased to somewhat biased writing a comfortable transition?

            • Is it important that science writers themselves have an awareness of the difference between science journalism and science communication?

            • How can readers of science writing tell the difference between science journalism and science communication?


Related questions are being raised in other arenas as well: see this piece by Matthew Ingram entitled Thanks to the web, journalism is now something you do – not something you are which explores the relationships between advocacy/activism and journalism.

Getting back to the ASC, are these questions important for us to consider as a community of people who talk about science in public spaces? I think yes, and I’m hoping this may come up as a potential topic for the ASC conference in February 2014. In addition to hearing from communicators and journalists who are ASC members, it’d be great to invite ‘outsiders’ along to get their perspectives as well.

I’m looking forward to the conference.



Sarah Keenihan
PhD | BMedSci | GradDipSciComm

Reading, writing and interpreting science. And other stuff. 

0419 976 834 | @sciencesarah | http://sciencesarah.wordpress.com/


Special Project: Science For Life.365









On 05/07/2013, at 7:40 AM, Bianca Nogrady wrote:


Thanks for posting this Lynne - it's an interesting read.


At the risk of opening a can of worms, I'm intrigued by the fact that a number of science journalists take the stand that they are not a 'cheer squad' for science, as Pallab Ghosh is described as saying in this article.


I understand very well that the job of a good science journalist is to ask the hard questions, to look critically at the data, to ask where the money come from and not to assume that science is truth.


But this assertion that one is not a cheerleader for science feels almost like a statement of emnity, like we have to take a stand against the hordes of pom-pom waving fanatics.


Isn't it possible to be both? I'm proud to proclaim that I'm an unrepentant science nerd. I love science and the process of scientific discovery and the knowledge that comes from that, and I'm always raving to friends about some amazing new bit of info I've discovered.


I'm very happy to stand up and trumpet 'Hooray for Science!' but I don't think this makes me any less of an effective journalist.


I'd be really interested to know people's thoughts on this.




On 5 July 2013 07:26, Griffiths, Lynne <Lynne.Griffiths@nwc.gov.au> wrote:


SciDev.Net has launched a new-look website - http://www.scidev.net/global/.  Their latest editorial features a discussion on science journalism and communication in the global context - http://www.scidev.net/global/communication/editorial-blog/science-journalism-and-communication-make-a-good-match.html?utm_medium=email&utm_source=SciDev.Net&utm_campaign=2679242_Launch+email+EN&utm_content=KazEditorial&dm_i=1SCG,1LFBE,AZRIZP,5IAH7,1

There are related articles that may be of interest - http://www.scidev.net/global/communication/


Lynne Griffiths
Director, Communication and Parliamentary Liaison
National Water Commission 
T 02 6102 6023   M 0412 786 945


IMPORTANT: This message, and any attachments to it, contains information
that is confidential and may also be the subject of legal professional or
other privilege. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you
must not review, copy, disseminate or disclose its contents to any other
party or take action in reliance of any material contained within it. If you
have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by
return email informing them of the mistake and delete all copies of the
message from your computer system.

ASC-list mailing list


Freelance science journalist, author and broadcaster

www.biancanogrady.com, 0411 420 913, Blackheath, NSW, Australia


The End: The Human Experience of Death (Random House Australia, May 2013)

www.theendbook.net, Twitter: @TheEndBook


The Sixth Wave: How to Succeed in a Resource-Limited World (Random House Australia, April 2010)

www.sixthwave.org, Twitter @SixthWaveBook

ASC-list mailing list


ASC-list mailing list


This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended only for the use of the
intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, dissemination, forwarding,
printing or copying of this email and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this email in error, please delete it immediately from your system and notify us by email at

Any views expressed in this email and any files transmitted with it are those of the individual
sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of CRC CARE Pty Ltd.

CRC CARE Pty Ltd does not represent or warrant that the attached files are free from computer
viruses or other defects. The user assumes all responsibility for any loss or damage resulting
directly or indirectly from the use of the attached files.

This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.