3 ms·

What have you learned about how to talk to the press? Bad coverage like this reflects back negatively on the research and the institution, sadly. Uni PR offic

by gohrt 11y ago

What have you learned about how to talk to the press? Bad coverage like this reflects back negatively on the research and the institution, sadly. Uni PR offices are famously bad at twisting and over-selling research results.

canjobear 11y ago
I think I've learned there's not much you can do. My advisor and I talked to two reporters: one from MIT News (https://newsoffice.mit.edu/2015/how-language-gives-your-brain-break-0803 https://newsoffice.mit.edu/2015/how-language-gives-your-brai...) and one from Science Magazine (http://news.sciencemag.org/social-sciences/2015/08/all-languages-have-evolved-have-common http://news.sciencemag.org/social-sciences/2015/08/all-langu...). They both communicated with us about all kinds of details in the articles, and let us comment on the drafts. We clearly stated what we did and didn't want to claim, and they did a good job conveying what we wanted while adding extra connections we hadn't thought of for popular appeal. On the other hand, we had no contact with anyone about the Ars Technica article. I've also seen some other articles cropping up that are copying the original articles, and making claims I wouldn't stand by. I don't think there's anything we can do about that.
- RobertoG 11y ago
  Have you considered demanding a correction? They are putting words in your mouth. Somebody should keep journalist accountable. A few days ago I tried to follow the source of an article in an online newspaper. The source was another online newspaper , in a different language, and the source for this one another one. Along the way things were added and removed, just like in a crazy telephone game. It makes you think about the news we read and take for granted.
  - azinman2 11y ago
    "Scientists notice small trend that may or may not be of importance to language" just isn't a very catchy headline.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
coldtea 11y ago
>Bad coverage like this reflects back negatively on the research and the institution, sadly On the contrary! It's usually assisted by the researchers and the institution, and it helps them get grants and free press "advertising".
mandor 11y ago
A good thing that we did for our last paper [1]: we have set up a FAQ [2] with the most common questions (we updated the FAQ when we received new questions). Thanks to the FAQ, the journalists do not "invent" too much and they have quotes that they can use. Overall, I think the FAQ helped a lot and it avoided some common mis-interpretations. [1] Paper: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v521/n7553/full/nature14422.html http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v521/n7553/full/nature1... | arxiv version & video: http://chronos.isir.upmc.fr/~mouret/website/nature_press.xhtml http://chronos.isir.upmc.fr/~mouret/website/nature_press.xht... [2] FAQ: http://chronos.isir.upmc.fr/~mouret/website/nature_press.xhtml#faq http://chronos.isir.upmc.fr/~mouret/website/nature_press.xht...
mandor 11y ago
Also: do not let the Uni PR office write the press release. Write it yourself and insist they use yours.

by gohrt 11y ago

canjobear 11y ago

I think I've learned there's not much you can do. My advisor and I talked to two reporters: one from MIT News (https://newsoffice.mit.edu/2015/how-language-gives-your-brain-break-0803 https://newsoffice.mit.edu/2015/how-language-gives-your-brai...) and one from Science Magazine (http://news.sciencemag.org/social-sciences/2015/08/all-languages-have-evolved-have-common http://news.sciencemag.org/social-sciences/2015/08/all-langu...). They both communicated with us about all kinds of details in the articles, and let us comment on the drafts. We clearly stated what we did and didn't want to claim, and they did a good job conveying what we wanted while adding extra connections we hadn't thought of for popular appeal. On the other hand, we had no contact with anyone about the Ars Technica article. I've also seen some other articles cropping up that are copying the original articles, and making claims I wouldn't stand by. I don't think there's anything we can do about that.

RobertoG 11y ago
Have you considered demanding a correction? They are putting words in your mouth. Somebody should keep journalist accountable. A few days ago I tried to follow the source of an article in an online newspaper. The source was another online newspaper , in a different language, and the source for this one another one. Along the way things were added and removed, just like in a crazy telephone game. It makes you think about the news we read and take for granted.
- azinman2 11y ago
  "Scientists notice small trend that may or may not be of importance to language" just isn't a very catchy headline.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

coldtea 11y ago

>Bad coverage like this reflects back negatively on the research and the institution, sadly On the contrary! It's usually assisted by the researchers and the institution, and it helps them get grants and free press "advertising".

mandor 11y ago

A good thing that we did for our last paper [1]: we have set up a FAQ [2] with the most common questions (we updated the FAQ when we received new questions). Thanks to the FAQ, the journalists do not "invent" too much and they have quotes that they can use. Overall, I think the FAQ helped a lot and it avoided some common mis-interpretations. [1] Paper: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v521/n7553/full/nature14422.html http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v521/n7553/full/nature1... | arxiv version & video: http://chronos.isir.upmc.fr/~mouret/website/nature_press.xhtml http://chronos.isir.upmc.fr/~mouret/website/nature_press.xht... [2] FAQ: http://chronos.isir.upmc.fr/~mouret/website/nature_press.xhtml#faq http://chronos.isir.upmc.fr/~mouret/website/nature_press.xht...

mandor 11y ago

Also: do not let the Uni PR office write the press release. Write it yourself and insist they use yours.