How to write and publish a scientific paper - Barbara Gastel, Robert A. Day 2022

After the interview
How to work with the media
Other topics in scientific communication

Once the story appears, have realistic expectations. Of course, it will be briefer and less technical than a journal article. It also will focus mainly on aspects of greatest interest to the public. Thus, it is likely to emphasize conclusions and implications, and it is unlikely to describe your methods in detail or to list your eight coauthors. In evaluating the story, often the relevant question is not “Was everything captured precisely?” but rather, “Will a member of the public come away with the correct idea?”

If a story is especially good, or if it has serious errors, consider providing feedback. Often, reporters hear only if others are displeased. If you think the reporter has done especially well, tell the reporter—and, if possible, also tell the editor. If a story has a major inaccuracy, also inform the reporter. Good reporters want to know so they can avoid repeating mistakes. If an error is serious, a correction may be published or aired.

Finally, think back on your interactions with the reporter. What did you do that turned out well? What could you have done better? Considering such questions can help you be even more effective the next time a reporter calls.