Kendall Haven Workshop at NASA GSFC

**February 2004**

*(Notes by David Herring)*

# I. It's All About Getting Results

-   What are our **objectives** in writing a given feature article?

-   Who's going to read it? Why will they read it? What will they get
    out of it?

    -   Envision your specific audience!

    -   You must have good, clear answers to these questions before you
        compose!

-   Good, effective writing is all about *tools*, or the elements of a
    story, and *practice* in using them.

-   The story framework allows you to include important information that
    you wish to communicate, while entertaining and engaging your
    audience.

    -   Research shows that if you want someone to believe your message;
        if you want them to remember it better & longer; if you want
        them to have positive associations w/ your message; they are
        likelier to do all these things if you adhere to the
        architecture of a story.

    -   Stories are far more effective at motivating people

    -   Stories create context, relevance & empathy. Thus they create
        context and relevance for information.

    -   Research shows that what triggers memory is the density of
        sensory details you associate w/ a memory. Stories tend to
        include a much greater density of sensory details. Adrenaline
        opens more neural sensors to record more sensory details---so
        exciting the reader by association with a character(s) enhances
        likelihood of remembrance and positive association. Details
        create "reality" from the reader's perspective.

    -   Research also shows that readers/listeners of stories are also
        better able to apply newly transmitted information to other, new
        situations. And readers/listeners are also likelier to seek out
        more information about the subject.

-   What is a **story**? What does it take to make a good story?

    -   The dictionary says a story is a narrative account of a real or
        imagined event(s). Kendall says, *the dictionary is wrong!*

    -   A story is defined by the presence of certain elements:

        -   A higher density of sensory details

    -   You have a story when you have all the core elements (below) and
        you can make it relevant to your reader.

-   Kendall made analogy b/t apples and apple pie. If apples are the
    stuff of science, the pie is how the story about the science is
    written to suit the tastes of the reader.

**II. The seven [elements]{.underline} of a story** (they comprise its
core)**:**

-   Stories are about **characters**. This is important -- characters
    define the way the reader receives or views the material. The EO can
    use characters more often and more strongly than we do, w/o having
    to worry about fictionalizing or invading their privacy. Stories
    have relevance to a reader b/c we have a character whose eyes
    through which we view the material.

-   What traits make the character interesting? **Character traits** go
    hand-in-hand with character and give added perspective on his/her
    goals and motives. Here are some traits that can help make
    characters interesting:

    -   Physical description (i.e., name, appearance, function or title,
        history, reminds you of {who...?}, friendships and
        relationships)

    -   Internal (i.e., personality, voice, abilities/talents,
        weakness/flaws, passions, fears)

    -   Situational (i.e., actions/reactions, feelings, and [core
        elements]{.underline} -\> goal, motives, problems and obstacles,
        risk & danger)---this is the category of traits most commonly
        exploited by the EO.

-   Stories must have a **goal**. This is what a character wants to do
    or get in a story. It defines the information and purpose of the
    story more in the mind of a reader than any other element of that
    story. Readers must have this information. The goal provides
    relevance and purpose for every event and action w/in the story.
    Fulfilling the goal resolves the story for the reader. Every event
    or action in the story must be relevant somehow to fulfilling the
    story's goal. In fiction, the goal of the story is often implied and
    made obvious in ways the reader can infer; but in the EO it's better
    to state the goal, or else readers will create one for themselves.
    Use the goal to make the subject relevant to the target audience.

-   Stories also should have a **motive**, which technically explains
    *why* the character wants that goal. This element is the most
    commonly overlooked and under-exploited by writers. In *The Lord of
    the Rings*, Frodo bears the ring, ultimately, [to save the
    world]{.underline}---that was his motive. If you don't give the
    reader motive, the reader tends to not appreciate the goal. Remind
    the reader why the scientist(s) want(s) the data and the specific
    answer(s) he is/they're looking for.

-   **Conflicts or problems**. What are the obstacles or hurdles b/t the
    character and his/her goal. The antagonist/obstacle can be either
    another character in the story, or some other entity w/in the
    story---such as a storm or a natural phenomenon. How does the
    obstacle create risk and danger? This can be a bit of reach for our
    EO stories, as typically our scientists minimize personal risk. But
    the point is: readers have to see that the obstacle actively blocks
    the character from reaching his goal for the reader to care.
    Conflicts and problems are what set the stage for excitement in the
    story b/c they introduce doubt as to the outcome. Here are some
    conflicts or problems with which we can emphasize:

    -   [Ignorance]{.underline}---scientists are out to advance
        understanding.

    -   [Lack of data]{.underline}---this one is a natural, as NASA has
        unique data sets that are demonstrably helping advance
        scientific understanding.

    -   Lack of technology---i.e., we've never been able to measure or
        observe something before now.

    -   Lack of funding---\<ahem\>

    -   Competition b/t scientists

    -   Public rejection---reaching conclusions that public or science
        community doesn't like

-   How does the character **struggle** to overcome the conflict or
    problem? Here is a good way to introduce satellite data sets (i.e.,
    the "cavalry to the rescue"). The hero of the story is the one who
    confronts the antagonist (or conflict or problem). It is the
    struggle that creates excitement in the reader and empathy for the
    character.

-   What **sensory details** will make the story seem *real*? In a
    written story, the details are effectively the "spotlight" for the
    main character(s). Only use details that help advance the story.
    Unnecessary details can be a distraction. Good details focus the
    reader on that information that is important, and that helps advance
    the character toward the goal.

-   **Theme**. What is the theme and how might it differ from the goal?
    [Goal]{.underline} is for the character, and [theme]{.underline} is
    for the reader. In fact, *characters* need not know or care about
    the theme at all. Theme dictates which ending the *reader* wants;
    and it will dictate how the readers interpret the ending or
    resolution of the story. Some possible themes for EO stories: (1)
    Earth science is important because Earth is the only home humans
    have, and we depend upon it, and there's so much about it we don't
    know and understand; and (2) space-based remote sensors are way cool
    and provide the most cost effective and efficient means for data
    collection (particularly on a large scale) than any other method.
    Theme determines what it is the writer wants the reader to take away
    from an article.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   NOTE: First person narrators should not present themselves as the
    hero of a story. Such first-person narrators are generally not
    successful b/c they will tend to either (a) turn the audience
    against them or (b) come across as "bragging."

-   The above story elements are effective and seeking out these bits of
    info up front when doing research or interviews will help writers
    tap into and unleash their power in a story.

-   There is nothing that says everything you write should adhere to the
    story elements. While they are effective and they do work, they are
    not essential. Some time, effort, and words must be expended to work
    out those elements and the details that will support them.

-   For EO, stories are not the only way to get across information.
    Again, comes down to target audience and intended purpose. Haven
    suggests picking a target audience, which helps the writer focus,
    but often that same piece *will still lend itself to other
    audiences*, and so focusing on one particular audience often makes a
    story more effective for *all* audiences.

## Day 2 Notes

*Opening remarks:*

-   Receivers of stories demand certain info and if you don't give it to
    them, they will create it on their own. Then, if they create their
    own and then the writer takes them somewhere else, readers may feel
    the writer has failed them. If writers satisfy readers' needs,
    they're much happier.

*There are four classic ways to open a story:*

1.  Show us a character doing something that makes them interesting ---
    quite a popular way to open a story. Movies do this all the time. If
    I can show the reader a character who is doing something, and even
    how the character feels about it, in the opening, then the reader
    instantly wants to know why they feel that way and what are their
    motives.

    a.  So, in an interview with a scientist, it is good to ask
        questions like: Was there ever a time when you were concerned or
        confused? And if they say yes, ask what they were doing at the
        time. Keep asking and prompt your scientific sources to give you
        as many sensory details as they can.

2.  Build goal and motive. Build up the importance of the outcome of the
    story. Present the significance of the story both to the reader as
    well as to the person who is doing the study. For the EO, it is
    important to do this early on. Ask the scientist: What were you
    after, and why were you after it? What will that info do? Who needs
    the info you generate(d) and for what will they use it? This is a
    good, easy way to establish relevance for the reader.

3.  Build up the antagonist. Build up the obstacles that the main
    character will have to overcome so that they seem big, bad, and
    dangerous. Let the reader know that someone is facing real danger
    for society's benefit.

4.  Plunge right in with the core elements (see notes above). Begin
    right away with narrative that introduces the 8 elements.

*When interviewing your sources, remember to do two things:*

1.  Get specific bits of info you have already defined that you want to
    get; and

2.  Make sure you let them talk about what they did enough to ensure
    that your pre-vision of what they did is accurate and correct.

• Herring on the Constraints and Issues Surrounding Telling NASA Earth
Science Stories:

1.  Building relevance. Often our topics seem two or three steps removed
    from remote sensing. (i.e., the spotted owl and its habitat)

*- Kendall admitted folks had asked him: Why are these people at NASA?
The answer is satellite data and remote sensing expertise. Satellite
data are essential, irreplaceable, and make the work of science more
efficient. The more prominently you place the use of satellite data in
your piece, the greater the relevancy the reader places on NASA and its
role in the science.*

2.  Politics and agendas everywhere you turn. Folks on Capital Hill want
    to kill the messenger &/or have anti-global warming agendas &/or
    have launched anti-global warming propaganda efforts. Conversely,
    there also folks in grassroots organizations who have launched what
    are sometimes "over-zealous" propaganda efforts. They may tend to
    either over-dramatize or exaggerate. Both groups are in contrast
    with scientists who are by nature usually conservative, and yet
    recognize the real risks and dangers inherent in global warming.

\- Kendall said, Pick your battles and only pick the battles you're
going to win. Also, eliminate "trigger words" when possible. "Global
warming" is a trigger word to avoid, when "climate change" may suffice.
Alternatively, you can be more specific by unpacking the term into
things like: "warming trend" or "human-induced warming" to better focus
and sidestep the baggage that comes w/ the term "global warming."

3.  Balance. How to create drama and "sell" the importance of the story,
    without overly dramatizing &/or exaggerating, particularly when you
    have your conservative scientist source behind you constantly
    reigning you in.

\- Something that separates scientific articles from popular stories is
the amount of details the reader gets. Sensory details, character
development, etc., all add up to make it not "feel" like a scientific
article. So a way to achieve balance will be to make deliberate
inclusion of character details and their motives and goals. And
certainly adding risk and danger where applicable. If you put in some
sense of risk and danger and don't put in the character's reaction to
that risk and danger, then you've let the air out of that "dramatic
balloon" --- i.e., you've undermined the drama. Also, character reaction
can lend more scientific credibility to the story. If, when composing a
story, the writer doesn't feel s/he has enough info to "sell" the story,
then it's probably time to go back and do a follow-up interview, or even
seek out a second source.

4.  Selling and emphasizing NASA's important role, without making it
    seem we're going it alone.

Kendall said, It's not NASA we need to sell. NASA is already famous.
It's the use of Earth observing satellites and remote sensors we need to
sell. Folks don't need NASA, ultimately, what they need is our satellite
data. So be sure to include that early on in our stories. This is what
sets us apart.

*Also, there are ways we could modify our site mission statement without
specifically aggrandizing NASA in ways that help clarify our purpose and
role, without the potential negative of seeming like an on-line brochure
or overly self-advocating.*

5.  Getting inside the "black box" of science and technology---how to
    best put a human face on the scientists, describe how they do their
    work, and how the remote sensors work.

\- People don't need to know how the black box works as much as they
need to know how the scientist uses it and what they do, or did, with
it.

6.  Focus & purpose. The DAACs tend to want to focus on their data sets
    and place the emphasis there, whereas the EO staff tends to want to
    focus more on the people who do science. Also, folks at HQ want to
    write for 12-year-olds, whereas we're aiming at a more highly
    educated "science attentive public." How to reconcile these?

*- Kendall said the readers' focus will really not ever be on data sets,
but rather on* **data in action***. Data in and of themselves just lie
there and do nothing. It takes* **humans** *to put data into action. So
that is where the writer's focus should be.*

7.  The newness of the information. Sometimes makes it hard for readers
    to appreciate its relevance. There is also sometimes risk in making
    sure it's right.

8.  The complexity of the information. We often have to construct
    elaborate and/or details background passages to set the stage and
    show relevance. But sometimes the reader gets lost in details. And
    all this in the face of bias and other propaganda -- who to believe?

9.  The backdrop of a public that is generally not literate about and/or
    not sympathetic to this subject.

10. The medium. Every medium has strengths and weaknesses. On the Web,
    most folks don't like to sit and read long passages; rather, they
    scan, hunt and peck. How to present all the necessary details and
    story elements, without overwhelming.

-   Kendall advised somehow making it obvious to our readers when there
    are multiple pages to a story, since we group them into discreet
    chunks.

-   Kendall says he personally, inherently doesn't trust what he finds
    on the Web. He generally wants to see how well the info is backed up
    by peer review and layers of edit and review, etc. So making that
    clear on the site really helps establish credibility.

-   Kendall suggested perhaps another button that says: "download so I
    can read it later" which affords folks who are browsing to come back
    later and read or print something at their own leisure.

11. We have a global readership. We must be careful about what analogies
    and figurative language we use as they can be easily misinterpreted.
    (See "Dr. Strangelove" example.)

12. How to accomplish our communications goals w/o resorting to clichés
    and "boilerplates" that make our text seem repetitive or, worse,
    boring.