TECHNOPOLICY BRIEF 20

HOW TO WRITE AN EFFECTIVE SCIENCESTORYRobert PowellAFRICAN TECHNOLOGY POLICY STUDIES NETWORKPublished byThe African Technology
Policy Studies Network,P.O. Box 10081, 00100 General Post Office,Nairobi, Kenya.
© 2008 African Technology
Policy Studies Network (ATPS)

Printed by
Newtec Concepts○○○○○○○○○○○○○○

○

○

○

○

○

○

ISBN: 9966-916-03-2○○○○○○○○○

ABOUT THE AFRICAN TECHNOLOGY POLICY STUDIES NETWORKThe African Technology Policy Studies Network (ATPS) is a multi-disciplinary
network of researchers, policy makers, actors in the private sector and other endusers interested in generating, promoting and strengthening innovative scienceand technology policies in Africa. With a regional secretariat in Nairobi, the network
operates through national chapters in 23 African countries, with an expansion plan
to cover the entire sub-Saharan Africa.
One of the objectives of the network is to disseminate research results to policy
makers, legislators, the organized private sector, civil society, mass media andfarmers’ groups through publications, dialogue and advocacy. Among its range ofpublications are the Working Paper Series (WPS), Research Paper Series (RPS),
Special Paper Series (SPS) and the Technopolicy Briefs.
Technopolicy Briefs Series are commissioned short papers written byexperts from all over the world specifically to address current science andtechnology policy concerns and questions in Africa. The briefs are also
summaries of technical papers published under our WPS, SPS and RPS
written to highlight significant policy recommendations. These briefs arewriten with the busy policymakers and non-specialists in mind. Thematerials are designed for general readership and help advance theadvocacy and knowledge brokerage roles of the ATPS.
ATPS is supported by a growing number of donors including the InternationalDevelopment Research Centre (IDRC), the Carnegie Corporation of New York, theRockefeller Foundation, the World Bank, the OPEC Fund, Ford Foundation, CocaCola Eastern Africa, the African Development Bank, and the Royal Dutch Government.

Acronyms
AIDSUN
MDGs

Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
United Nations
Millennium Development Goals

Table of Contents
1.0

Do you understand the issue?

12.0

What kind of language should you use?

33.0

Why explain and provide background information?

44.0Should journalists like scientists use statistics to explain?

55.0

Why a strong and powerful lead?

76.0

What about ordinary people?

87.0

Is the research relevant and newsworthy?

98.0

Making an impact

10

1.0
Do you Understand the Issue?
A good science story should interest everybody and be easy for anyone to understand.
It should grab the attention of your readers/listeners/viewers, even if they do nothave much in the way of formal education, let alone a specialist understanding ofscientific issues.
The first thing to ensure is that you, the writer, understands clearly the issue you arewriting about. If you do not, you will not know the best news angle to take.
Furthermore, if you do not really understand the issue at hand, there is a strong
chance that you will make mistakes and misrepresent it to your target audience.
To understand the issue properly, you must read the source documentation carefully.
This is likely to be full of technical jargon, much of which you will not understand.
When you come across specialist terms or concepts that baffle you, find out what
they mean, then devise a way of expressing them in plain non-technical language.
There are four ways you can do this:
1. Ask the author of the document
2. Ask another expert on the same issue
3. Look up the word in a dictionary
4. Look up the word on the internet (an internet search is likely to give you
more useful information than a dictionary)
Do not be afraid to ask a ‘stupid question’. If you don’t know what a certain wordor concept means, neither will most of your readers/listeners viewers.
The worst thing you can possibly do is to simply pass on chunks of jargon from yoursource document, thinking “I have no idea what this means, but it looks important,and somebody out there will understand it.” No-one will.
1○ ○ ○ ○ ○

ATPS Technopolicy Brief 20
Once you have read and understood the source document, you should ask anyquestions that arise in your mind about it. Above all, think of the questions that yourtarget audience would want answered. These should always include the following
three questions:
1. How does this science affect me?
2. What should happen next?
3. What problems might arise in implementing these recommendations?
Put these questions to the author of the document you want to report on. If he/she is
not available ask another expert on the same issue.
In fact, it is often useful to ask an independent expert what he/she thinks about thepiece of science you are writing about in order to gain perspective. Scientists, justlike politicians, can often draw very different conclusions from the same piece ofevidence!
If the science you are writing about has implications for government policy orhuman behaviour, it may also be a good idea to ask political and religious leaders
for their views/opinions.

○2○

○

○

2.0
What Kind of Language Should You Use?
However important the information may be and however accurately you have
conveyed it, there is no point publishing or broadcasting your story if most of yourtarget audience fails to understand it.
Write in plain simple language in short sentences. Avoid using technical jargon.
Although this may be the everyday working language of the scientific community,
most ordinary people will not understand it.
Wherever you can, use common and familiar words that ordinary people canunderstand easily. Do not talk about ‘pulmonary and cardiovascular complications’.
Talk about ‘lung and heart problems’.
Avoid the stiff, pompous and official language of scientific papers and government.
Use the plain, lively and interesting language of everyday speech. Most people
would refer to a ‘community water point’ as ‘the village pump’.
Write as if you were preparing a script to be read over the radio. Try reading yourarticle aloud. Does it flow easily? Does it make sense? Try reading it aloud to afriend or a member of your family.
If they understand your story and are interested by it you are on to a winner. If theirattention wanders or they ask you to repeat certain sentences, you will know that
more work needs to be done to make your story accessible and reader-friendly.

3○ ○ ○ ○ ○3.0
Why Explain and Provide Background
Information?
Sometimes you will have to mention unfamiliar scientific terms in your reporting.
Whenever you do so, you must explain them clearly. It is not enough to say:“Scientists blame last year’s severe floods in East Africa on the El Nino effect.” You
have to explain what El Nino is. If you are uncertain yourself, you must take thetrouble to find out!
You should say something like: “Scientists blame last year’s severe floods in East
Africa on a temporary reversal of ocean currents off the coast of South America.
Warm tropical water began to flow down the coast of Ecuador and Peru in aphenomenon called El Nino. Whenever this current appears, it disrupts normal
weather patterns throughout the world.”
Scientists, governments and international organisations seldom explain the jargon
they use, but that does not excuse you from the task. If your target audience does
not clearly understand what you say, you will be failing in your task as acommunicator.
We hear a lot about Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Sometimes they aresimply reduced to the acronym MDG. Everyone assumes that MDGs are a goodthing, but how many people actually know what they are? Take the trouble toexplain to your readers, listeners or viewers that “The Millennium Development
Goals are a series of targets set by the United Nations (UN) in 2000 to improve theliving conditions of the world’s poorest people by 2015.”
If you are writing about water issues, you might usefully add: “They include reducing
the number of people without access to safe drinking water by half.” Or if you arewriting about preventable diseases, you might add: “They include reducing thedeath rate of children under five by two thirds.”

4○ ○ ○ ○ ○

4.0
Should Journalists Like Scientists Use
Statistics to Explain?
Scientists (and economists) love numbers, but on their own numbers mean very
little to ordinary people. It is also very difficult for people to remember lots of numbers
and appreciate their significance.
In radio and television, you should try to avoid mentioning more than three key
numbers per story. That is a good guideline for print journalists too.
When you do mention a number you should explain very clearly why it is significant.
You must also put the number in a context that shows why it is important. Don’t justsay: “The proposed bio-mass power station in Bulawayo would generate 15megawatts of electricity.”
Consult an expert to help you spell out what this means in practical terms. “Theproposed power station would capture enough gas from Bulawayo’s main rubbish
dumps to generate 15 megawatts of electricity – enough to supply the city with aquarter of its of power needs.”
Broadcasters must ensure that their listeners and viewers understand what thepresenter is saying immediately. Newspaper and magazine readers can read asentence again if they do not understand it the first time. But people who listen toradio or watch television do not have that luxury. They cannot get a repeat.
Try to avoid using numbers in copy by telling your target audience instead, what thenumbers imply. For instance, instead of saying “researchers found that the level ofmercury in the town’s drinking water was dangerously high at 50 parts per billion,”
you could say: “researchers found that the level of mercury in the town’s drinking
water was 25 times higher than the level considered safe for human consumption.”

5○ ○ ○ ○ ○ATPS Technopolicy Brief 20
It requires imagination and careful research by the journalist to come up with thissort of user-friendly expression that accurately reflect what a number implies, but itis worth the effort.

○6○

○

○

5.0
Why a Strong and Powerful Lead?
A strong and powerful lead that clearly expresses a key idea or image will draw
people into your story. Make your lead vivid and specific and do not be afraid tomake it controversial. You can explain the controversy as the story develops. Suchas, “Christian missionaries are persuading rural communities in Benin to abandon
traditional beliefs and practices that once regulated hunting and fishing and helped
to preserve the environment, a local scientist has said.”
You can mention further into the story that the scientist himself is a fervent Christianand that he wants the missionaries to incorporate the message of environmental
protection into their preaching as they convert people from voodoo.
Avoid general leads that say very little and simply turn people off. Do not start yourstory by saying; “A biologist working at the University of Nairobi has made an importantdiscovery which could benefit millions of Kenyans.” This is too vague and bland.
Go straight to the point and be as clear and specific as possible in your focus. For
example, “Fish farmers in Kenya could double their output of Tilapia by feedingthese fresh water fish certain types of common leaf that stimulate their growth rate,a university researcher has found.” If you fail to grab the attention of your target
audience at the outset, they are unlikely to read on or continue listening to the restof your story, no matter how interesting it may be.
The lead you choose will not necessarily be the main conclusion of the scientificpaper that provided the peg for your story. Such as, “A prominent Senegalesebiologist, who has just married his fourth wife, has published research showingthat HIV/AIDS is more prevalent in polygamous families than in single partner
marriages.”
People will naturally be interested in the fact that the scientist’s own behaviour is atodds with the conclusion of his research!
7○ ○ ○ ○ ○6.0
What About Ordinary People?
If a scientist says that he or she has discovered something that could have a big
impact on the lives of ordinary people, ask those people who are potentially affectedby the research for their views.
Many recommendations by scientists prove difficult to implement if they are
considered socially unacceptable. Do you remember the resistance to polio
vaccination by certain Muslim groups in northern Nigeria?
So ask the people affected by the research about their reaction to it and incorporate
their comments in your story.
Are villagers really worried by the pollution of their local river? And if so where else
could they go to get water?
Will people accept a new product being sprayed on the walls of their homes tokeep away mosquitoes? If not, what are their objections?
How to tell an interesting story• Focus on effectively getting one or two key points across in an interestingand entertaining manner.

• Do not feel that your story must reflect everything contained in the scientificpaper on which it is based. If you try to do that, your story risks being long,rambling and superficial in its analysis.
• Miss out the boring bits. Quality is always better than quantity.

8○ ○ ○ ○ ○7.0
Is the Research Relevant and Newsworthy?
Be challenging. Is the research you are reading about really interesting, useful orrelevant to your target audience? Is it worth a story at all? If not, do not bore youraudience with it. Find a better subject to write about. Do not feel that you have towrite a story, just because somebody has given you a fat dossier of importantsounding, but totally boring paper work.
Ask how practical it would be to implement the scientist’s conclusions. How much
would it cost? And who would pay? The United States or Western Europe might
have the medical and financial resources to check their women every two years forsigns of breast cancer. But is that really a feasible proposition in Togo or Swaziland,
which are much poorer countries with meagre budgets and other more urgent
health priorities?
Ask too what problems might arise from implementing any of the scientificrecommendations. If you stop factories or flower farms from polluting local rivers,
will they simply shut down, throwing thousands of people out of work?
Be critical. If you have doubts about the importance or the validity of the scientificdocument you have read, get a second opinion from another expert in the samefield
But be fair. Do not criticise a scientist for wasting money on irrelevant research, justbecause you personally do not see the point of it. If politicians and other scientists
criticise a piece of research on these grounds, you should reflect their views. But
give the author of the research a full right of reply to defend himself.

9○ ○ ○ ○ ○8.0
Making an Impact
Your story will only be successful if a lot of people read it, think about it and react toit.
If people talk about your story to their friends and family you will have succeeded ingenerating an impact.
If a civil society activist or politician picks up your story and publicly demands
action based on the scientific findings you have publicised, you will have really hitthe spot!

10○ ○ ○ ○ ○

ATPS Technopolicy Briefs Series(ATPS Technopolicy Brief 1) Who Benefits from the New International Intellectual Property Rights
Regime? And What Should Africa Do? by Ha-Joon Chang(ATPS Technopolicy Brief 2) How Can We Constitutionalize Innovation, Technology and IntellectualProperty in Kenya ? by Bernard Sihanya(ATPS Technopolicy Brief 3) What Can Biotechnology Do For Africa? How Can The AssociatedRisks And Uncertainties Be Managed? by Norman Clark(ATPS Technopolicy Brief 4) Who Needs Technology Policy? by Ha-Joon Chang(ATPS Technopolicy Brief 5) Keeping Hunger at Bay: Genetic Engineering and Food Security in
sub-Saharan Africa by John Mugabe(ATPS Technopolicy Brief 6) Science in a Globalizing World: Implications for Africa by Awele
Maduemezia(ATPS Technopolicy Brief 7) How can Science and Technology in Africa be Formulated andImplemented? by Osita Ogbu
(ATPS Technopolicy Brief 8) How can Science and Technology Policy Aid Nigeria’s
Reconstruction? by Osita Ogbu
(ATPS Technopolicy Brief 9) Can Africa Develop without Science and Technology by OsitaOgbu(ATPS Technopolicy Brief 10) How can Innovation Systems and Innovative Clusters be used toDevelop Africa? by Osita Ogbu
(ATPS Technopolicy Brief 11) Science and Technology and Food Security in Africa? by ATPS/MCST(ATPS Technopolicy Brief 12) What Danger Lies in the WTO-NAMA Negotiations for Africa? by HaJoon Chang(ATPS Technopolicy Brief 13) What is sui generis System of Intellectual Property Rights? by MoniWekesa

Acknowledgement
This paper is based on research carried out under the auspices of the African
Technology Policy Studies Network’s (ATPS), Water and Environment Programme
funded by the Royal Dutch Government – Activity no: 10385-DCO0020791. Theauthors thank Dr. Kevin Chika Urama of the Macaulay Institute, Aberdeen, UK for hiscontributions to the study in his capacity as the ATPS Lead Resource Person for theW&E programme. The authors also thank the ATPS Communications and Outreach
Department for their editorial support.

Robert Powell is a former journalist with the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)and currently a freelance media consultant based in Scotland.

For more information this series and ATPS Contact:

The Executive Director
The African Technology Policy Studies Network
3rd Floor, The Chancery, Valley RoadP.O. Box 10081 00100 General Post Office
Nairobi, Kenya
Tel: +254-2-2714092/168/498
Fax: +254-2-2714028
Email: info@atpsnet.org
Website: http://www.atpsnet.org