New York Times Post

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/26/business/global/26rare.html?_r=1&hp

Interesting..is “green energy” really “green?”

Reaching an agreement?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/16/science/earth/16forest.html?_r=1&hp

Can it be?  Is the world finally agreeing on one thing? And can that “thing” be our environment? 

The need to do something about the way we utilize and produce energy is increasingly becoming a focus of news outlet, and is an intense and complicated topic to watch as it slowly begins to surface as a political issue.  Our environment, whether you apply that term to mean water, minerals, air, and so on, or attach it to something as simple as our surroundings, is going to be a difficult and convoluted topic to tackle in 2010.  There are many perspectives to take on the issue of reducing carbon emissions.  How do you interpret, analyze, study and tackle this issue?

Risky Business

Jane Gregory and Steve Miller discussed risk assessment in this week’s reading.  The chapter, “An ABC of Risk—Apples, Beef, and Comets,” noted how the media play a large role in covering risk-related stories, and how the coverage of “Mad Cow Disease” and others have caused public hysteria. The authors, however, didn’t put all the blame in the hands of the reporters. In the case of covering the Alar scare in apples, the media, after studying headlines and articles, were found not guilty of over playing the risk. However, the increasing coverage of the topic caused the public to be concerned.

I thought the case of the Alar scare brought up an interesting point. Is covering something risky, risky in and of itself? With the recent scare of the swine flu, for example, newspapers in Athens were reporting that “no cases of the swine flu have been found.” Though they didn’t say the swine flu was rapidly spreading, or over dramatize the “epidemic”, the fact they covered it, increased the public’s exposure to the problem, and therefore increased the public’s concern.

I can recall discussing the swine flu coverage in my Media Ethics class. Many who chimed in on discussion agreed that the local coverage of the swine flu was unnecessary. If nothing is happening, then why is it news?  I think that covering something because it’s a popular topic doesn’t make it newsworthy. It’s funny how the media have so much power, but don’t seem to recognize, or exercise it.  News groups and reporters have the choice of what to cover, and they should take that choice with much consideration. If, as an editor or a journalist, you don’t think something is worthy to cover, then don’t cover it. That goes double when you’re talking about risk assessment.

Another interesting point mentioned in the readings is the effect of the overexposure of these so-called risky problems. When the public becomes scared that the food they’re eating is contaminated, they’ll stop buying it. Journalists should take this into consideration.  I can remember when McDonalds was accused of having worms in their food. Though the rumor was nothing more than that, it caused the sales of McDonalds to decrease dramatically. It’s a psychological issue with the public. Even if someone informs you that it’s OK to eat the French fries now, if the public thinks of worms every time they think of McDonalds, they’ll lose their appetite and eat elsewhere.  I mean who wouldn’t?

Covering risky issues is risky business. Make sure you don’t get tunnel vision. Look at a problem and ask yourself, “how can we cover this?” What is everyone else missing? Maybe you’ll pick up on something that others looked over.

 

What incidents can you recall where the media blew a topic well out of proportion?

What is your personal definition of risk?

What is your vision of how the public will track environmental issues and developments in five years?

I think there’s not one answer to this question, but many. Obviously the Internet has had an influence on print publications, but people still look toward printed articles because they’re safe, secure, and have a reputation of being trustworthy.

So, to answer the question, I’d bet money that people will still being buying newspapers but will rely upon other forms of media for their environment news as well.  TV, blogs, Internet, radio, and twitter will probably be the most popular of the media outlets.

Why? because they’re quick, easily accessible, and oh ya, free.

It also depends on the environmental issues at the current time. If there is a national disaster on its way, the Internet will probably most likely be used. If it’s information about the red woods or some ongoing problem, print sources will probably be used by the interested party because they contain more in-depth reportage.

It’ll be interesting to see how communication outlets develop and change over the next five years.

Environmental Communication

This week’ readings include chapters three and four of Environmental Communication and the Public Sphere. Author Robert Cox focuses two chapters on the public, and what its role it when it comes to reporting environmental issues. Chapter three, “Public Participation in Environmental Decisions,” offers insight on public participation, and the rules and regulations in regards to gathering public information.

The chapter is more like a crash course on communication law. It’s exceedingly helpful to those who don’t know a lot about, or would like to know more about the policies surrounding access to certain types of information.

One helpful graphic used by Cox is his summary of different modes of public participation in environmental decisions. He lists three modes; the right to know, right to comment, and the right of standing. Perpendicular to the terms includes the explanation of each, which descries the mode, authority and democratic principle relating to that mode.

Cox describes these modes in depth throughout the chapter, but the box is a useful tool to help guide the reader through the political jargon.

I found this tactic to be useful. I had to do a presentation on this week’s readings and this box helped me square up any questions I had in relation to the somewhat confusing descriptions of laws/modes.

Chapter three was successfully informative. I felt as if Cox did an impressive job describing the different cases, laws and acts that relate to environment issues. He was easy to follow and concise, which made the information more readable. Chapter four, “Conflict Resolution Through Collaboration,” describes cases where a decision was found through mediation or collaborative effort. Cox mentions the various types of groups that are involved in conflict resolution, and lists the eight attributes that distinguish collaboration from tradition forms of public participation.

I really liked how Cox followed public participation with conflict resolution because it’s like he leads you to water and tells you how to drink it. I think that’s a problem with a lot of theories. They tell you what’s wrong, but don’t tell you what you can do to solve it. Cox, however, is the exception. He gives information about ways to act locally, and refers to previous cases that appear to set a precedent for collaborative decision-making. I was pleased to have these two chapters to report on because they offered more important information that the other readings we’ve done in the past. I think it’s important for everyone, not just journalists, to know what their rights ware when it comes to communication.

Do you agree with my last statement? Or do you think it doesn’t really matter?

What role do journalists play in discussing the different modes of participation that Cox talks about?

Reading Response

Megan Moseley

Environmental Journalism

 

            The first two chapters of Environmental Communication and the Public Sphere serve as an introduction to covering environment-related news. Author Robert Cox acts as a mentor to the aspiring science writer, and outlines the difficulties, frameworks, and different perspectives needed in covering complex scientific material.

            The first chapter (Conceptual Perspectives) sheds light on the different aspects of science writing. Cox notes that there isn’t a lack of demand for environmental coverage; it’s a lack of identification to the various areas of study when it comes to environmental communication that is an issue.

            Cox speaks about how he believes it is our beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors relating to nature and environmental problems that are mediated or influenced by communication. He also thinks that environmental communication is an area of study. Cox says, “the book focuses on the role of speech, art, symbols, and so forth in defining the human-nature relationship that is the earliest example of the thesis that human communication mediates or negotiates our relations to, and understanding of, the world beyond out minds.”

            I found that quote to be intriguing. Many human beings think they’re the dominant species on this planet. Whether that idea is true or not, they act in this world like everything in it is theirs for their taking. Thinking about nature and our surroundings would help eliminate, or at least decrease, the problems that come with that attitude.

            For Cox, he notes several areas of study. The several areas of study includes environmental rhetoric and discourse, media and environmental journalism, public participation in environmental decision making, advocacy campaigns waged by environmental groups, environmental collaboration and conflict resolution, risk communication, and representations of nature in popular culture and green marketing.

            Each of these areas are explored in-depth, and provide insight on the various groups and sub-groups affecting the environment, and environmental coverage.

            The second chapter (Rhetorically Shaping the Environment) begins by stating in science writing, we all have to be careful with the meanings we attach to words such as “environment” and “wilderness.”

             By giving examples from the past, Cox shows how attaching the wrong meaning to these words can cause damage in the public sphere. Aside from a few examples, it seemed like Cox focused more on the history behind environmental change and movements in the second chapter than he did in the first.

            He mentioned defiance of Puritan idealism, adaption of sublime wilderness, stories of men questing for national identity, and the emergence of transcendentalism. All informative, and by stating examples of former influences in environmental awareness, this chapter helps inspire and educate the audience on how science writing has affected communication and action in the past.

April 17, 2009

As a journalism student, learning how to write and write well can seem like an uphill battle. Hours are spent writing and rewriting, and sometimes, getting started seems impossible.

I eat when I’m nervous, and when I can’t think of the most concise words to form the perfect sentence need to make my article “sing” I head to my kitchen for some Pringles.

It wasn’t until the final chapter of Elise Hankcock’s Ideas into Words that I found out what I was doing is a procrastination technique that she calls “polishing the silverware.” Hancock offers insight in her final chapters on how to tackle writing-related issues, such as “polishing silverware.”

Chapter four describes the importance of structure. Form, she notes, follows function. From the way the story sounds to the intended message, Hancock carefully describes useful techniques for writing a science story.

“The Nitty Gritty of Writing” (Chapter five) discusses the creative process of writing. When an aspiring writer sits down and tries to formulate his or her thoughts on paper, much or little can happen. Hancock offers helpful tips on how to phrase certain sentences so arguments are clear, and describes the systematic steps required in editing to help improve the overall work.

Chapter six includes information about the importance of refining drafts. Hancock realizes that writing a story one time is insufficient. It takes time, and multiple reviews before an article is complete. An article may go back and forth from an editor to an author a few times before it’s declared a finished product. Hancock offers helpful tips on how to critique an unfinished draft.

Another point mentioned in Chapter six is Hancock’s advice on what to do when the One of her tips for getting over writer’s block, is to take a break. I found this tip to be rather useful. Trying to do it all in one sitting can be tedious. It’s helpful to get up, and come back to the writing at a later time.

Getting started is half the battle. Hancock encourages her audience to ask themselves, “what’s stopping my train of thought?” It’s important to notice the issue, and to deal with it. It is that you have other things weighing on your mind, or do you not have enough information to conclude your findings? These are the types of questions Hancock inspires her readers to ask in order to improve their overall writing habits.

Are there any other stylistic formulas for formatting your paper other than techniques mentioned in Hancock’s book?

It seems as if Hancock repeated some statements. Could she have taken some of her own advice and shortened the book?

April 10, 2009

 

Kicking off our readings for the quarter, our class was required to read and analyze the texts of two books (Science in Public and Ideas into Words).

The latter of the readings acts more like a hand guide for writers. The author, Elise Hancock, spreads her wisdom of writing. The first chapter focuses on attitudes. It is Hancock’s belief through experience that writing and attitude are directly connected. She offers positive thoughts and inspirational sentences that seem to scream, “You can do it!”

Chapters two and three offer more insight on how the research and writing process work. Through helpful tips and entertaining anecdotes, Hancock’s first three chapters really assist in learning how to write. Though some might find it corny and repetitive, the fundamentals that Hancock preaches are important for any writer, no matter their caliber.

Science in Public tracks the history of science writing and raises many questions on the issues and topics that interfere with the communication process between science, and the public.  The authors, Jane Gregory and Steve Miller, use historical science events to track what they refer to as low and high levels of scientific knowledge and the public.

The first chapter describes the benefits of a society that is understanding and up to date of science.  These benefits include those of national security, and economic benefit, and Aesthetic benefit, and the benefit of informed citizenship.  After asking the reader what he or she thinks the role of science is in Western culture. Though it may sound like a question, it is more or less a transitional sentence used to follow into the next chapter, which deals with “Science in Public Culture.”

Reading Responses

 

 #3

            The first two chapters of Environmental Communication and the Public Sphere serve as an introduction to covering environment-related news. Author Robert Cox acts as a mentor to the aspiring science writer, and outlines the difficulties, frameworks, and different perspectives needed in covering complex scientific material.

            The first chapter (Conceptual Perspectives) sheds light on the different aspects of science writing. Cox notes that there isn’t a lack of demand for environmental coverage; it’s a lack of identification to the various areas of study when it comes to environmental communication that is an issue.

            Cox speaks about how he believes it is our beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors relating to nature and environmental problems that are mediated or influenced by communication. He also thinks that environmental communication is an area of study. Cox says, “the book focuses on the role of speech, art, symbols, and so forth in defining the human-nature relationship that is the earliest example of the thesis that human communication mediates or negotiates our relations to, and understanding of, the world beyond out minds.”

            I found that quote to be intriguing. Many human beings think they’re the dominant species on this planet. Whether that idea is true or not, they act in this world like everything in it is theirs for their taking. Thinking about nature and our surroundings would help eliminate, or at least decrease, the problems that come with that attitude.

            For Cox, he notes several areas of study. The several areas of study includes environmental rhetoric and discourse, media and environmental journalism, public participation in environmental decision making, advocacy campaigns waged by environmental groups, environmental collaboration and conflict resolution, risk communication, and representations of nature in popular culture and green marketing.

            Each of these areas are explored in-depth, and provide insight on the various groups and sub-groups affecting the environment, and environmental coverage.

            The second chapter (Rhetorically Shaping the Environment) begins by stating in science writing, we all have to be careful with the meanings we attach to words such as “environment” and “wilderness.”

             By giving examples from the past, Cox shows how attaching the wrong meaning to these words can cause damage in the public sphere. Aside from a few examples, it seemed like Cox focused more on the history behind environmental change and movements in the second chapter than he did in the first.

            He mentioned defiance of Puritan idealism, adaption of sublime wilderness, stories of men questing for national identity, and the emergence of transcendentalism. All informative, and by stating examples of former influences in environmental awareness, this chapter helps inspire and educate the audience on how science writing has affected communication and action in the past.