u
EDITORIAL Reporting on science for the public The average American citizen is becoming more and more aware that things are happening to this planet that may not be good. Stories about the greenhouse effect, toxic hazards, ozone layer depletion, and destruction of forest ecosystems are found in the popular press almost daily. Major city newspapers and national magazines now devote large sections to ecological crises that are perceived to be imminent, and even small town newspapers often lead the way in educating citizens on issues such as garbage disposal or water pollution. Teachers use these articles as resource materials, and as a result school children are now more informed than ever before about stresses to the world environment, the threats of huge amounts of wastes, and the effects of overpopulation. To a very large extent the new environmental awareness reflects a change in the coverage of these issues by the popular press. Ecological news now sells and is therefore getting proportional coverage. This is so different from the days before the first Earth Day that we often forget the attitudes that prevailed then. One can argue that the press is merely reflecting the growing awareness of the people about ecological issues, but in a very real sense the press is also leading. Newspapers and magazines are an increasingly important educational resource of our time. Many feel, however, that the quality of science reporting must continue to improve. What is needed now is more attention to accuracy. We in the scientific profession are hypercritical, of course, but it is obvious that science reporters too often do not have enough basic understanding of the science they are reporting and, more importantly, do not have the time to properly research their subject. Although scientists sympathize
0013-936X/89/0923-0491$01.50/0 0 1989 American Chemical Society
with tight editorial deadlines, many feel that something must be done to minimize the technical errors, trivial treatment, and misleading statements that are found too often in popular writings on environmental issues. Perhaps what is needed are more alliances between scientists and journalists: more joint workshops, more meetings away from the pressure of jobs, more jointly authored articles. Also, science reporters must be given time for continuing education and they must be allowed to specialize. On the other side, scientists must give time to journalists who seek our advice and, if necessary, we must commit even more of our time to public education through the popular press. Foreign scientists, especially in Latin America, are much more prone to write articles for editorial sections of newspapers than scientists are in this country. It is increasingly clear that major ecological issuesthose that affect the planet as well as our professiondepend on the education of the general public. We all must accept this responsibility and give a measure of ourselves to improve the level of science reporting in this country.
Environ. Sci. Technol., Vol. 23, No. 5,1989 491
