How do news outlets know to report on "an article to be published in [insert scholarly journal here]"?
March 11, 2010 7:18 AM Subscribe
How do news outlets know to report on "an article to be published in [insert scholarly journal here]"?
For example:
In an article to be published in Science, the premier scientific journal in the U.S., researchers from Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pa.; Cardiff University in Wales, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) report that bilayer clusters measuring about one-half nanometre in diameter and containing only about 10 gold atoms are responsible for triggering the CO oxidation reaction.
Who exactly is putting out the advance word in these cases? Is there someone on staff at, say, The New England Journal of Medicine, who has a list of upcoming stories and decides, "This one might attract some mainstream coverage" and then sends out press releases to major media outlets?
For example:
In an article to be published in Science, the premier scientific journal in the U.S., researchers from Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pa.; Cardiff University in Wales, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) report that bilayer clusters measuring about one-half nanometre in diameter and containing only about 10 gold atoms are responsible for triggering the CO oxidation reaction.
Who exactly is putting out the advance word in these cases? Is there someone on staff at, say, The New England Journal of Medicine, who has a list of upcoming stories and decides, "This one might attract some mainstream coverage" and then sends out press releases to major media outlets?
Best answer: To be more explicit, for the science and medical journals we publish, we have a publicity department. Their job is to know which journals are the 'war room' journals for a fiscal year or for a quarter and to push the marketing on those journals to as many media outlets as they feel would be productive.
posted by spicynuts at 7:22 AM on March 11, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by spicynuts at 7:22 AM on March 11, 2010 [2 favorites]
Yes, journals (or the organizations who publish them) have media relations or marketing departments.
posted by decathecting at 7:22 AM on March 11, 2010
posted by decathecting at 7:22 AM on March 11, 2010
Where I used to work, the research institute itself would put out press releases on journal articles that were of general interest to the public.
They tended to be pretty hokey.
posted by sciencegeek at 7:23 AM on March 11, 2010 [2 favorites]
They tended to be pretty hokey.
posted by sciencegeek at 7:23 AM on March 11, 2010 [2 favorites]
Response by poster: sciencegeek: "Where I used to work, the research institute itself would put out press releases on journal articles that were of general interest to the public.
They tended to be pretty hokey."
Well, what got me pondering the question was the story on today's Morning Edition about chicken sex.
Thank you all for the replies.
posted by Joe Beese at 7:25 AM on March 11, 2010
They tended to be pretty hokey."
Well, what got me pondering the question was the story on today's Morning Edition about chicken sex.
Thank you all for the replies.
posted by Joe Beese at 7:25 AM on March 11, 2010
You might be interested in the journal embargo period as well.
posted by demiurge at 7:34 AM on March 11, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by demiurge at 7:34 AM on March 11, 2010 [1 favorite]
A journal paper is submitted by the authors long before it is published by them. Once it is accepted there is still a lead time before it is actually published. In that time the journal can send out press releases or preprints of a paper for journalists to use in writing an article. So a news article might come out before the actual journal article does.
posted by Large Marge at 8:05 AM on March 11, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by Large Marge at 8:05 AM on March 11, 2010 [1 favorite]
Many journals also maintain a prepublication server. They post papers there that have been accepted and reviewed, but haven't yet appeared in the print edition. This is a good thing for science, as it means that work gets disseminated more quickly. As I understand it, physicsists pretty much always post their papers to the arxiv before formal publication.
posted by chrisamiller at 8:16 AM on March 11, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by chrisamiller at 8:16 AM on March 11, 2010 [1 favorite]
Science journalist here.
It's mostly due to embargoed papers and their corresponding press releases -- which, in my opinion, are destructive to journalism.
Embargoes are agreements that journalists make with peer-reviewed publications and other sources of news: in exchange for an advance copy of a paper (or advance notice of an event or some such), the source gets to set limits on when the journalist can publish a piece about the news item.
The sources love embargoes because it helps them control the flow of information and, arguably, increases coverage. Many journalists love embargoes because they get prepackaged stories that they can report at a leisurely pace -- and are all but guaranteed not to be scooped (as nobody can write the story before the embargo expires.)
Embargoes in science journalism often get defended on the grounds that it allows reporters to spend more time doing deep reporting on a story. I think the effect is just the opposite. It encourages lazy journalism, and allows a small handful of sources to dominate -- and control -- the coverage of science in the news.
posted by cgs06 at 8:36 AM on March 11, 2010 [4 favorites]
It's mostly due to embargoed papers and their corresponding press releases -- which, in my opinion, are destructive to journalism.
Embargoes are agreements that journalists make with peer-reviewed publications and other sources of news: in exchange for an advance copy of a paper (or advance notice of an event or some such), the source gets to set limits on when the journalist can publish a piece about the news item.
The sources love embargoes because it helps them control the flow of information and, arguably, increases coverage. Many journalists love embargoes because they get prepackaged stories that they can report at a leisurely pace -- and are all but guaranteed not to be scooped (as nobody can write the story before the embargo expires.)
Embargoes in science journalism often get defended on the grounds that it allows reporters to spend more time doing deep reporting on a story. I think the effect is just the opposite. It encourages lazy journalism, and allows a small handful of sources to dominate -- and control -- the coverage of science in the news.
posted by cgs06 at 8:36 AM on March 11, 2010 [4 favorites]
Speaking of laziness...
It turns out that article in question is identical to one that appeared on another site here, which at least gives the provenance of the story: a Lehigh University press release.
This is really common. You'd be surprised at how often press releases are republished almost verbatim, even by "serious" news outlets.
posted by cgs06 at 9:36 AM on March 11, 2010 [2 favorites]
It turns out that article in question is identical to one that appeared on another site here, which at least gives the provenance of the story: a Lehigh University press release.
This is really common. You'd be surprised at how often press releases are republished almost verbatim, even by "serious" news outlets.
posted by cgs06 at 9:36 AM on March 11, 2010 [2 favorites]
To expand on cgs06's point, many times the press release is from the author's university rather than the journal's publisher, especially if the release (or the paper!) includes dodgy or just simply not-particularly-groundbreaking science. Language Log in particular has several entertaining examples of news stories "developed" from universities' press releases trumpeting new journal articles, but the phenomenon is certainly not limited to linguistics (or, uh, poultry parts).
posted by FlyingMonkey at 3:07 PM on March 11, 2010
posted by FlyingMonkey at 3:07 PM on March 11, 2010
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by spicynuts at 7:20 AM on March 11, 2010