All right. Hello everyone today, our guest speakers, Hillary Rosner. Hillary is a colleague here at CU Boulder. And as a scholar in residence in the department of Journalism. She also helps mentor students in the Center for Environmental Journalism and works with journalist, participating in the ted scripts, fellowships in environmental journalism. Rosner has spent much of her career as a journalist and editor and her specialty is long form narrative stories about science and the environment. She is an award winning writer and has been published in a variety of publications including National Geographic, the new York Times, the Atlantic wired scientific American, among many others. Welcome Hillary and thank you for being here today. >> I'm happy to be here. Thanks for having me. All right, so we've learned that there are different types of professional science writers such as journalists and institutional science writers. So which one are you? And how did you get into your current position? >> Sure. So I am a science journalist and editor. I actually started out, so I got my start in journalism rather than in science. I actually had very little science background When I started my career, I went to a liberal arts college that did not have a science requirement and so I did not take science. And so I started my career in journalism, working at the Village Voice and kind of worked at a bunch of different media outlets in new York. And then at some point I got really, really interested in environmental issues and I wanted to cover them and I suddenly realized that I had this big gaping hole in my knowledge. And so I actually came to see you and did a masters in Environmental studies. I moved from new York to Boulder and I did a masters in Environmental Studies to kind of really just like beef up my background knowledge of environmental issues. So I took a whole lot of classes in a broad range of departments that see you and that kind of launched my career as a science journalist. Are there certain environmental issues that really attracted you to Environmental journalism? Yeah, I mean I think I've always been interested in conservation and so that's kind of my you know, that's very dear to my heart. So I write frequently about biodiversity issues, about land use change, about a wide array of other conservation related issues, but that's really been kind of my bread and butter and what I what I like most to write about. So I actually I write a lot about agricultural issues, but kind of in the vein of conservation, so like what does converting a rainforest to a palm oil plantation and due to the ecosystem? Yeah, absolutely. Remember learning about that when I was at the Pittsburgh Zoo? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay, so what are some common pitfalls that you've observed when scientists right for the general public? So what are some of the most important stylistic points that scientists should keep in mind if they want to write for the general public? Yeah. So I mean I think the first thing that I always think of is just for scientists to remember that they are human beings first. And I think this is something that you know, scientists have sort of drilled out of them in the process of learning about science, right? It's just it's about the science, it's not about you, but there's a reason why every scientist decided to become a scientist, right? Like there's some kind of origin story about like how that person decided to become an astronomer and to study like this particular field of astronomy. And you know, devote their lives to studying this area. And that story is what will get people in the general public interested in the signs. So like, you know the little girl who grew up in Montana and you know, grew up under this big star guy watching, watching the stars and then became an astronomer. Like that is the kind of story that really moved people and so where the person who had a grandmother watched a grandparent die of some particular disease and decided that like their role in life was going to be to try to find a cure for that disease. Like those are the human stories. And so I think it's really important for scientists to not be afraid to put their personal stories out there to write in the first person to show what they're passionate about and why they're passionate about it, because that's the place where other human beings connect to their story. And particularly in the world where science has become so politicized and there's this whole kind of anti science contingent, I think those are the people also who are more likely to be captivated by a human story and then, and then think, wow, this person is a scientist, I sort of never thought of scientists this way. So that would be, that's my first thing. I think the second thing is just recognizing jargon, which may be some scientists part about, but I think we sometimes don't even realize that we're speaking in jargon and I know I am actually, you know, I'm guilty of this myself. I write so regularly about ecology and conservation biology that I forgot the people. I don't actually know these terms because I'm so immersed in it. And so I think, you know, for scientists, like it's a great idea to maybe show something that you've written to someone who's not a scientist in your field and they can kind of help you identify what is the jargon in here. And so it can be like particular terms, and maybe it's not that you're not going to maybe it's not that you're going to avoid them, but you're going to define me. And so like bring the public in, you know, here's here's this term and now I'm going to tell you what it means and it's kind of like an interesting word, it's an interesting term. So it's not about not using jargon, but it's about just making sure that people actually understand what you're talking about. And then the 3rd thing is just that, you know, there are narrative devices that you know, universally move us and one of those is conflict or tension. And so when I'm writing a story, I always want there to be some kind of conflict or tension at the heart of it. The nice thing in you know, and what I do is that it's it's usually built in because it's some kind of environmental problem. But in a lot of science, there's a journey, right? Like science is kind of inherently a journey of discovery. There's a person who's trying to, you know, against all odds, discover this thing or push this thing forward. And and that makes for a great storytelling. So, so science, I mean, part of why science is so much fun to cover is because there are is this kind of built in journey narrative, the quest narrative, It's kind of one of the basic human narratives. But so I think it's important for scientists just kind of remember that and keep that in mind. Like, is there a conflict? Is their attention? Is there something that I can put in my story as a way to kind of keep the narrative going? Yeah, that's excellent. So, on that same vein, so when we think about introducing conflict and we've talked in this course about how introducing conflict can be a really important part of storytelling. How do you avoid kind of the doom and gloom? I've seen a lot of scientists do this and when I did conservation education, this is a big problem because it's easy to just overwhelm people with a negative, but we know from the research that that really doesn't work for science communication. So, do you have any advice on how to introduce a conflict and have that story without it being doom and gloom? Yeah. I mean, yes, this is something that I definitely struggle with all the time. I like, you know, I think again, there's a built in solution to that, which is just that stories of human ingenuity are really satisfying and hopeful, right? And so like, yes, here's this problem, right? We have this new disease, this pandemic that's taken over and it's kind of stopped economies and killed hundreds of thousands of people. But hey, you know what? Scientists have discovered a vaccine. Like there are multiple vaccines out there now. And so like it's ultimately a story of human triumph. Covid this very depressing story in this very bleak history but I think it will ultimately be remembered as a story of human triumph. And a story of the ingenuity of scientists who actually so quickly were able to get vaccines going that are effective against this disease. And so I think just trying to even the story of one scientists struggle to try to solve a problem even if they don't actually solve the [LAUGH] problem. I think just that there's hope in just the story of somebody trying to solve a problem. So that's really what I try, people talk about solutions journalism as a way to sort of focus on the positive. And I think sometimes the problem with solutions journalism is that sometimes because of this need for conflict and tension. Sometimes solutions are not actually as satisfying to read about as [LAUGH] the problems. I think that's one reason why journalists often focus on the problem more. But I do think that there can be something very uplifting in the story of someone searching for a solution, even if they don't necessarily find it. >> Yeah, that makes a lot of sense I think it's a common pitfall for scientists too. Because when we put grants together you have to spend so much time writing a [LAUGH] problem and then proposing the solutions, I think it can be a little bit of mindset switch. >> Yeah, I think that's what it is I mean and I went through a period, I got depressed right? Like I felt like I was always the Debbie Downer at cocktail parties and my husband likes to remind me about one trip we took years ago where we were in Oregon on the Oregon coast. And he was like, look at all these beautiful mountains and forests and all, I could see where the clear cut hillside. [LAUGH] and so you do get, it is easy to fall into that trap but again like I sort of had to get myself out of it by focusing on I decided to focus on genetics. And what the whole genetics and genomics revolution was doing for conservation and it hadn't necessarily solved any problems yet. But the fact that it was sort of like presenting this whole new avenue of research and this whole new way of thinking about some conservation problems was very appealing to me. And hopeful and I actually think it allowed me to write about conservation stories in a broader range of publications that might not otherwise have accepted the stories, right? Like I did a story for Wired and did a couple of conservation stories were Wired and I think because they had this like human ingenuity thing first they were appealing to this kind of tech audience that tends to be want more optimism. >> Nice so on that same theme [COUGH] so in this course students are going to get a chance to try on a bunch of different hats when it comes to science communication, whether it's oral presentations, writing or tech or artistic. So if somebody wants to just dabble with science writing or start to get their foot in the door, what's a good way to get started? What's a media like speaking of medium, is it going to media? Is it writing a blog? Is it what do you recommend people do if they want to just try it? >> Yeah, so I think for people who want to try Science writing, science communication alongside their career as scientists, there are a couple different things that I would recommend. One is The Conversation which is a website that specifically publishes pieces by academics. And then those pieces get picked up and run in a lot of different publications. And so, CU has a lot of universities have a specific relationship with the conversation where they have like a whole section for their researchers. And so that's a great way to kind stake a claim on your particular field that you want to write about and to put yourself out there as an expert in this field. And just to try your hand at something, it might not go any further, some pieces just run on the conversation, but a lot of pieces get picked up in, local media outlets or national outlets. And so that's definitely something I would start with, and that can also help you, if you're just trying to like get comfortable writing in this different kind of way, that's a great place to start. I think twitter can be a really terrific platform and just kind of getting involved in a conversation, and so, if there's a publication that you like to read, right? Let's say you really like to read The Atlantic, and you can see, someday I might want to publish a piece in The Atlantic. You could follow a bunch of writers and editors from The Atlantic on Twitter and maybe strike up a conversation with them and kind of see where that leads. So just participating in conversations on Twitter can be great and then I think local news outlets are also a great place for scientists to get started. So, you might want to write an Op-ed for your local newspaper or maybe you could propose a column for them, your local newspaper, the website of your local radio station. Those are all great, they can be great platforms for getting an audience and kind of like building your brand as a science communicator. And writing about things that are kind of close to home and then again, you can kind of like stake a claim to. >> Excellent, these are all great tips. Okay, so we've already talked a little bit with you about storytelling and we've talked about storytelling in the course. So what are your, some of your favorite ways to incorporate principles of storytelling into your scientific writings? We've talked about conflict, what else do you do to try to illustrate that story? >> So I think characters are really important and so again, you can be a character in your own story. And I love stories that are written by scientists where they are a character in their own story and where they're really telling you about, what it's like. And there have been so many pieces, during COVID about all these pieces that are written by, doctors in an emergency rooms who are kind of writing about their own experience. I think scientists again, like writing about what you're actually doing when you are out in the field collecting data or in your lab, putting yourself in the story as a character can be a great tool. For me obviously I'm not a scientist, but I like to have strong characters in my stories and again sometimes those characters have a particular conflict, right? Like maybe they are trying to find a solution to a problem, they're working on a project that they feel like it's a step in the right direction even though they wish the world were different. And they could be working on something entirely different like so there may be conflicted about their particular project even though they feel like it's the best solution within their particular combines. So strong characters are super important details, right? So like I like to not at the moment so nobody is traveling right now but you know I really like to go out in the field with scientists, that's kind of how I do most of my research. And so I think kind of letting the public see how science actually unfolds. So I like to talk about when when I started grad school at CU, I had never written about science, I knew very little about what scientists actually do. And I had an opportunity to go out in the field in Costa Rica with some CU researchers who were doing a rainforest experiment and one of them was a fellow grad student. And the week before we were going she was like can you come to Target with me because I have to buy some tupperware that I'm then going to you know cut holes in with an exacto knife. And I have to buy some straws that I'm going to stick in there and I was like what are you talking about? And she's like well there isn't actually there's nothing that I can buy off the shelf to do my research with. So I'm making this these devices with these things that I'm buying a Target. And to me that was just so, I felt like my head was going to split open because I just couldn't believe I was like, that's how science is done. You like cut up tupperware with an exacto knife to make the tool that you need. And like I was so fascinated by that. And since then I've just, I've always want to know what tools are you using and where do you get them and how does this all work? And I think that people again like the public really responds to that people want to know because they just don't. They just think about like science is this kind of reversal thing, but there's so many different kind of creative and clever ways that people do science. And so that's another thing like the kind of it's like the method section, I guess in a journal article except that is written, those are usually written in a much more dry way. And I think behind the dry talk about methods, there's like a person going to target and buying tupperware. >> Yeah, that's a human element that you brought up before too. >> Yeah, exactly. >> All right, so, [COUGH] can you give an example or of examples of some kind of science writing that just made you really excited. Something that was done really well. Something that was done really different or a publication that maybe you seek out on a daily basis to go read. >> Yeah, so without let's see. I think there I think right now there are is a ton of amazing science journalism happening. And so I think there are big media outlets like the New York Times, the Washington Post, National Geographic, the Atlantic are just putting out incredible science content. And about really obvious things and about less than obvious things. The Atlantic did a series that was I think a two year series called Life Up Close, which I would definitely recommend checking out. It's a series of long form pieces, just about all different aspects of science. So everything there's some COVID or vaccine research. I wrote a piece about Caribou conservation, there's a piece about earthworms and how they're kind of taking over the world and it's not necessarily a good thing. There's just this tremendous variety of science stories on great topics. So I would definitely recommend checking those out. I think that the Atlantic is doing generally great science journalism, Ed Young, who writes for them has done some terrific big picture stories about COVID. I think Covid in general has for all the terrible things that it has done, it has really brought science to the public and there's so much great journalism being done about Covid. And if you think about it, it's like kind of like the ultimate science story. And so it's from the day that had emerged in China, it was this mystery, right? Which is a great, that's a great mystery. And how did it actually, what was its animal host and how did it actually jump from its animal host to humans? And what did we actually do? How did human behavior and the way we treat the environment and ecosystems make that come out of the rain forest and jump to humans. And then the whole then there's all this sort of illness and trying to figure out what is the path of this disease. And then of course, later on, you get the politicization of science right? With like the whole debate about mask wearing and all the other social distancing, all the precautions and it bumps up against culture and politics. And then you've got like the triumph of vaccines, but like the huge logistical nightmare about like how do you actually get them into people's arms. And then you come up against vaccine resistance, which is another cultural phenomenon. So there's just been like all across the board amazing science journalism about about Covid and I do. I think the New York Times has done a tremendous job. Poor of Amanda Billy who's been covering it has been doing great work. So, those are just some things that jump to mind. >> All right, excellent. Is there anything else you'd like to share with us today? >> Yeah, [LAUGH] I just want to say, I think it's so important that scientists do science communication for the general public and I'm a science journalist, right? So like that's a little bit telling scientists to do science communication is like now I'm making scientists my competitors. [LAUGH] So I wouldn't say that unless I really believed it. But I just think that again for the public to see that scientists are human beings that struggle with the same things that we all struggle with. And that they've made a decision to commit their lives to something because they think that what they're doing is really valid and important. That is what this country needs and what the world needs right now. So I just think in whatever capacity scientists want to do communication great like we need it. >> Excellent on that. Well, thank you so much for being here today. >> Yeah, absolutely. Thank you.
