Simple journalistsorsimple scientists?: are environmental issues too complex for the media?

5 Pages·1992·0.26 MB·English

by  Harry Recher

activities and the land to be used are so process. Playing their part can only improve
uncertain and obscure that I am unable to the quality of decision-making and help to
make any real assessment of its impact. No sustain our environmental values. Indeed, I
evidence was called from the author of the would go so far as to say that they have a
EIS to support its conclusions or recom- positive duty to contribute. As Professor Harry
mendations. I found expert evidence called Rechefis) recently said:
by the developer contradictory and
"Courts that deal with environmental issues
unconvincing. Opinions in the main were
require ecological data and they require the
formed without any real experience or
interpretation of those data by ecologists."
understanding of all of the processes
involved, or without any attempt to make
a proper assessment. In all of the REFERENCES
circumstances this Court could not make a ('~FAIRWMTHPE.,R 1,9 92. Problems in, and suggestions for
determination of the application according improving the use of science in environmental impact
to law otherwise than by refusal, and there- assessment. Awh-(~ltonB iolopirl 5(2): 112.
fore the only appropriate order is that the 'l'Fox, M., 1992. Adequacy and relevance of description of
appeal be upheld." the natural environment in environmental impact state-
ments. Awholton Biolopirt 5(2): 113.
While I can understand the chariness of '~RECHEHR., ,1 992. Ecology on Tlial. Pp. 2534 in Zoology
scientists to become immersed in EIA pro- in Cwtl ed by D. Lunney. Royal Zoological Society of
cedures I urge them to participate in the NSW, Mosman, NSW.
Simple journalists or simple scientists?:
are environmental issues too complex for the media?
Harry F. Recher
Department of Ecosystem Management, The University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351
(This paper war delinered to a conference entitled "Reporting the Environment", organized by the Centre of independent
Journalism on September 30, 1992 held at the Mitchell Libray, Sydney.)
INTRODUCTION think that it dates to the publication of Rachel
Carson's Silat Spring in 1961 that brought
Despite the recession, the environment is a
pollution into the backyards and kitchens of
major concern of Australians. Only unemploy-
Americans, but its development and growth as
ment is considered more important in the
a political and social force for change is a
short-term, while the health of the environ-
product of the media and the advent of mass
ment dominates such traditionally important
communication.
issues as the economy, education and welfare
in people's perception of their long-term well- Ironically the reporting of environmental
being. It is evident that concern for the way we events by the media and the popularity of
use and manage our natural resources as well natural history programmes has fostered the
as our awareness of environmental degrada- development of an environmental ethic in an
tion and the need for more effective conserva- increasingly urbanized world where decreasing
tion programmes has been incorporated into numbers of people ever come into direct contact
the way society functions. The issues will
with natural environments. Although there
change, but the environment will remain on have been a few key and high profile players
the political and social agenda through this such as David Attenborough, Rachel Carson,
decade and well into the 21st century. Paul Ehrlich, and David Suzuki, most of the
Although there was concern about water credit for the development of a public awareness
pollution, the destruction of forests, soil of the environment belongs to the journalists
erosion, and the loss of wildlife early in the who daily investigate and report on local,
19th century, the public perception of environ- regional, national and global environmental
mental degradation and concern for our events. In my view they have achieved a great
environmental future is relatively new. I like to deal.
December 7992 Ausiralian Zoologist, Vol. 28(14) 19
Interviews and Journalists lack of depth - more facts are needed
and could be presented without confusing
It is not uncommon for scientists to be critical
readers. As the public becomes better
of the way environmental issues are reported
educated and more aware of environmental
in the media. It is also not uncommon for
problems, the media needs to respond by
scientists to be critical of the way they were
giving more in-depth information.
interviewed by a journalist and the way the
interview was reported or edited. My own the couerage o f e n z i r m dp oblams is parochial
experiences with interviews to the press, radio - the major daily papers should report on
or television are different. I have found that: important resource management issues and
environmental problems in other states and
Almost all journalists quickly grasp and can cities even though they may be more local
understand a scientific explanation of than national in interest. All environmental
environmental problems. If these problems problems are symptoms of more fundamental
arise, it is invariably because the reporter is national and global problems and it assists
inexperienced and a bit of patience on my in developing solutions and finding the
part is required. political will to resolve problems for the
public to understand the full scope of issues
Almost invariably the interview is reported
facing the nation.
accurately, albeit in a simple format.
Recorded interviews have been edited kindly issues are not/ollowed up - that is, an issue is
to delete my indiscretions and to highlight reported when it first appears, but, as its
certain points. Simplicity and highlighting impact on readership's wanes, it is difficult
may focus on the more sensational, but this to find it reported even though the problem
is necessary to command attention and it remains. The classic example is beach
does put a message across. pollution, a problem that is present
throughout the year, but is news only in
The presentation of environmental events in
summer when people want to go boating or
simple English has been and will remain
swimming. Exceptions to this are the thinning
fundamental to the development of an
of the ozone layer and the greenhouse
environmental ethic and to the understanding
effect, both of which are monitored closely
of environmental issues by the put~lic.M ost
by the press.
people have not been trained in the sciences
-
and only a minority have tertiary education. important issues receive poor coverage opinions
Simple English, clear expression and a brief will differ on what is important or not
message are the hallmarks of effective science important, but too frequently the issues that
and environmental communication with the are reported are those that are emotive (e.g.,
lay public. hunting kangaroos), dramatic (e.g., bush
fires), and visually provocative (e.g., logging
None of this is to say that problems with
blockades) and not necessarily of long-term
environmental reporting do not exist or that
significance. Less dramatic and more complex
journalists could not do a betterjob. As part of
issues, such as land degradation and over-
our programme in resource management at
exploitation of fisheries, receive relatively
the University of New England, Armidale, we
little attention despite their long-term
expect our first year students to analyse the
significance to the economy and the well-
reporting of resource management and environ-
being of people.
mental issues by the major daily papers. This
helps students to get into the habit c)f reading If these are real problems, they arise
the papers, to become familar with the kinds primarily because articles are written and
of issues that the media is reporting, and to stories broadcast to sell a product be it a
develop their analytical skills. They are asked newspaper or a television station. Perhaps the
to quantify the presentation of environmental media needs to acknowledge its important role in
events so they can address questions of accuracy education and devote more effort to in-depth
of reporting, bias and detail. Are the most coverage and analysis of enuironmental issues.
important issues covered by the media? Is
him in reporting - some media accounts of
equal coverage given of events in the cities and
environmental problems reflect the interests
country areas? Do papers differ in editorial
and prejudices of the reporter. There was
comments?
probably no greater master of this art than
Studenu identify the following as matters of the late Peter Hunt of Earthworm fame.
concern or ways that would improve environ- Peter had all the talents of a skilled barrister
mental reporting by the media: in selecting "witnesses" and asking precisely
20 Australian Zoolo~ist,V al. 28f1-4)
the questions needed to obtain the answen he inaccurate or misleading infmmation is presented
wanted. A few print journalists have these - a report may be misleading because not
same talents. The converse also occurs and all the facts are presented.
some people are very adept at using the media 8 complex issues are simplified - the iJs, ands and
to promote their views and opinions when
buts of the scientist may be deleted and
interviewed. Learning to use the media is a
jargon is translated into everyday words.
skill I urge all my students to master.
These are criticisms I hear most frequently
Manipulation of the facts is done by both
from other scientists. Typically the complaint
sides in environmental disputes and the most
by my aggrieved colleague is phrased in the
conspicuous distortions of the truth appear in
following ways;
editorials and articles written by columnists.
These are the journalists who represent the "I didn't say that!"
established order; the status quo. The usual "The reporter didn't understand (or was incapable
slant in their editorials or columns is to reject ~Junderstanding)w hat I said."
environmental problems as being important or
"There is more to the sto7y!"
even as being real. In one column rejecting the
"The person quoted doesn't know anything about the
notion of land degradation in Australia as a
subject."
serious concern of the nation, the author went
so far as to claim that after 40 years of farming and so on
on his family property there was more soil than
These may be and sometimes are valid
when they started. Greenies (a derisory term
criticisms, but we need to consider how the
applied to people who profess a concern for
problems arose in the first place. Why didn't
the future) are regularly abused as emotional,
the reporter understand or get it right? Why
anti-development, unconcerned about people,
wasn't all the information presented? Why
distorters of the truth, uninformed and wrong
were the words (the jargon) of the scientist
(inaccurate or selective use of facts). Invariably
changed? and, most importantly, why weren't
these attacks come from journalists and editors
the best authorities (those who are supposed to
representing people who are obsessive about
be best informed) consulted or quoted?
profits, development (in a material sense), and
resource exploitation. They reject concern for These complaints arise because remarkably
the environment not because they are not few scientists make an effort to communicate
aware of the problems or fail to understand with the media or with the lay public. When
the risks, but because concern for the future of some do try, they are unable to put their
national and global environments challenges message in a form that is easy to understand.
the fundamental tenants of a growth economy Thus, I identify two issues:
predicated on material wealth and short-term
8 Thefirst is the failure (the unwillingness) of
profits.
scientists to communicate the results of
The fact that the Australian public ranks the research directly to the public. The way to
environment as a long-term concern illustrates do this, of course, is through the media in
how out of step these people are with the the broadest sense and not just via elite
emerging environmental ethic and why their science programmes geared to an educated
attacks are so virulent. The few with the least audience.
to lose are determined to dominate and
8 The second is the inability of most scientists to
degrade the majority with most to lose. That
communicate in simple language; many cau-
is, those who may only lose material goods or
not communicate at all. I reject the notion
profits are prepared to sacrifice the health and
that science, including environmental issues,
environmental well-being of others to maintain
can only be described using a specialized
their positions of material wealth and power.
jargon. A Natural Legacy: Ecology in Awtralia,
an ecology text that I edited with Dan Lunney
Simple Scientists
and Irina Dunn, manages to present the
Although it is easy to find fault with environ- entire field of ecology without resort to
mental reporting, as my students have shown, either jargon or esoteric mathematics. It is
it does not appear to me that it is primarily the easy to understand and a pleasure to read.
fault of journalists. Consider the criticisms of All science can be presented in the same
environmental reporting by scientists: way.
issues are sensationalized - there is little There are separate, but overlapping reasons
question that this occurs and the furore over why most scientists are unwilling or cannot
the greenhouse effect in 1988 is an example. communicate. Howard Latin, an American
Australian Zwlogist, Vol. 28(14) 21
Fulbright Scholar from Rutgers University panels that influence everything from
School of Law, lists six reasons why ". . . employment opportunities and promotions
scientific attitudes may be inappropriate and to the receipt of research grants.
even harmful to conservation efforts." The
The fears are real (see B. Martin 1981,
reasons identified by Latin as the bases of the
The Ecologist, Pp. 33-43) and any Australian
problems that scientists have in communica- scientist who has taken a public position or
tion are, in an abbreviated form: merely provided information on controversial
environmental issues (e.g., forestry, water
"Scientists suspend judgement when /aced by
pollution, rnis-uses of agricultural chemicals,
uncertainty"
environmental threats to human health) has
"Scientists wually require a high degree of con-
experienced the jibes and retributions of
fidence, 90 or 95 per cent, befme research
employers and colleagues.
findings will be accepted as . . . reliable."
Articles written for lay people or lectures to
"Scientists . . . prqer m e d ata to less."
public (non-professional) audiences are
". . . one dominant goal [of science], improved
w given little value or weight in decisions
knowledge, almost uniuersally accepted."
about promotions and research support.
Scientists generally reserue their greatest
respect. . ,for original conceptvaliultions . . ., Most scientists who are educated at Austra-
lian (or British) universities receive little or
while . . . applied research receives little prestige. "
no instruction in communication. They
"Scientists reject conclusions bared on emotion,
enter university with high school level
moral judgements, and social or aesthetic English and verbal skills, and they receive
valves . . . " their Ph.D. with about the same level of
(Latin 1992, unpublished abstract How expression. Along the way they have
Scientists Can Help Cmerue Coral Reefs)). acquired the language of the field of their
speciality and to survive (pass) they use
Constrained in these ways, it is almost jargon instead of the simple English they are
impossible to communicate in simple language incapable of writing. After all, it is only
or to comment on environmental issues when necessary that they be understood by other
the experiment (total human domination of specialists in the same field.
the planet) hasn't been completed. There are
What follows, in too human a dimension,
three other reasons why scientists have difficulty
is the rejection of anyone not part of
in communicating and why, therefore, the
the inner circle and who uses the same
media don't always receive all the facts or have
language. A disdain for communication
access to the best andlor most authoritative
develops (to the point that few scientists
sources. The reasons are:
even attend departmental seminars outside
Many Australian scientists are prevented from their area of specialization)a nd especially of
speaking publicly or with media by restrictions communicating with the public. They do not
imposed by their employers (mostly govern- know how to communicate, they cannot
ment departments or agencies). Others are communicate, and in self-justification they
afraid that their public comments will affect deride the efforts of others and belittle the
their careers, jeopardize research funds or media.
lead to restrictions on their research (e.g.,
It also follows, that when they do try to
obtaining permits to work in particular
communicate, they cannot explain them-
areas). These concerns are especially apt in
selves clearly and succinctly. They get it
the context of the environmental debate
wrong, but it is the journalist or interviewer
where many issues are emotional and have
who is blamed.
political and economic implications.
There is also a related problem associated
Careers may be affected not only by with science education at universities. Not
employers failing to grant advancement, but only are young scientists denied the
by the adverse response of other scientists opportunity to develop their communica-
who see public comment as irrelevant and tion skills, but they learn little about the
unscientific. More senior colleagues may society in which they live and work. They
actively discourage younger people from take no arts or humanities. There is no
becoming involved in environmental issues training in foreign languages. Nothing is
or in communicating with the media (see H. taught about ethics, religion or aesthetics.
Trinca, The Australian p. 13, 19 August Science is taught and practised in a vacuum
1992). Such senior colleagues often sit on that has no history, no humanity and no
22 Australian Zoologist, Vo1. 28(1-4)
emotion. It is therefore not surprising that want to ensure better and more in-depth
so many scientists find it difficult to relate reporting of the environment.
their work to the human community or even
to understand that others might be ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
interested in what they are doing. To them
I would like to thank Alan Knight and the
giving an interview becomes an ordeal.
Centre for Independent Journalism for the
opportunity to attend the conference and par-
Simple journalists or simple scientists?
ticipate in lively discussion on the role of the
There is no such thing as an environmental media in reporting the environment. I would
issue too complex for simple journalists; there also like to thank the many journalists who
are only simple scientists who fail to under- over the years have given me the opportunity
stand the complexity of the media and its to present my views on the environment to a
responsibility to the public. A responsibility wider audience than I could ever hope to reach
which more scientists should share, if they through the pages of learned journals.
VIEWPOINT
The Resource Assessment Commission loses its nerve:
the Forest and Timber Inquiry sidesteps an evaluation of
the impact of forestry operations on forest fauna
Daniel Lunney
Editor
In its final report of the Forest and Timber clearly possible. In fact, both published and
Inquiry, in March 1992, the Resource Assess- unpublished sources were examined. The RAC
ment Commission (RAC) squibbed its responsi- had given a consultancy to the CSIRO Division
bility on the issue of the impact of forestry of Wildlife and Ecology to undertake a survey
operations on forest fauna. The opportunity of the published literature on the subject, while
and resources to undertake a comprehensive the unpublished literature was surveyed by the
review were available; its failure to do so looks RAC with the assistance of the Department of
like a loss of courage. Conservation and Land Management (CALM)
in Western Australia (H.07, Vol. 2A, RAC
In paragraph 7.29 (p. 160, Vol. 1, RAC
1992). The results of these surveys were
1992), the Commission concluded: "The litera- certainly useful in identifying the size and
ture about impacts of human uses of forests is
scope of the research on the human impact on
not reviewed here: such a review would need Australian forests, and this was probably the
to cover hundreds of Australian references, RAC's greatest contribution on the subject.
and thousands of references if the world
The RAC states that more than 2 000
literature were included. The Inquiry took the
published and unpublished scientific papers
view that a comprehensive review of this type
were identified at the early stages of the survey.
would do little to resolve the controversy about
Of these, 372 published papers (including
forest uses and their impact on forest values."
108 on animals) and 168 unpublished papers
Given the available time (from the end of met the rules for inclusion in the database
1989 to March 1992) and budget ($3.41m), (H.17, Vol 2A; RAC 1992). Of the published
(Greg McColl, Acting Chairman, Resource papers, 268 contained new data, and 90 were
Assessment Commission in "Letters" in the review papers; of the unpublished papers, 126
Sydney Morning Herald, 6 November, 1992), the contained new data and 42 were review papers
task of reviewing hundreds of Australian refer- (H.18, Vol. 2A, RAC 1992). (Subsequent to the
ences on the human impacts on forests was issue of its final report in March 1992, the RAC
December 1992 Australian Zoologist, Vol. 28(14) 23