| |
Spring 2008
|
Stempra newsletter
INTERVIEW: Alok Jha, Science reporter, The Guardian Claire Bithell (CB) How did you get into journalism? Alok Jha (AJ) I started at university, writing for the college newspaper. Mainly music reviews at first, then moving into news and features. After a Masters in science communication at Imperial College I persuaded a small magazine to give me a job as a junior reporter, where I learnt the basics of professional reporting and wound up getting a job at the Guardian five years ago. CB What does your typical day entail? AJ Just over half the time involves covering diary stories from journals and press conferences. Typically this means pitching, researching and writing several stories a day, some of which don't end up making the next day's paper. The more rewarding part of the job involves meeting scientists and going into research labs to see people at work – the best stories come from these visits and the bonus is that they're usually exclusives too. CB What are the main factors which dictate whether a story gets in the paper? AJ It has to be entertaining, relevant and important (in that order). In this context, entertaining can mean that there's a good story behind the work or that it has interesting and useful applications, not necessarily that it's laugh-a-minute. Often a good picture will push a story that might not otherwise have made it. CB What makes a good story for the Guardian? AJ All of the above. But we're also interested in audio, video and blog posts, so not everything has to be straight news. If we can find inventive multimedia ways to tell a story, that helps to get it onto our website or podcast. CB How do you persuade experts to speak to you? AJ I very rarely find myself having to persuade anyone to talk: if a scientist has published a paper, they've usually keen to tell you more. If someone won't talk I don't really push it much further as usually someone else knows about the work and I'll find that person. CB What makes a good press officer as far as you are concerned? AJ The best press officers think exactly like news journalists – not only with how they pick and pitch stories (they know the paper inside out and can suggest which section a story might be best for) but also the way they write press releases (these will get to the point very quickly, like a news story would). In addition, once a story has me hooked, the best press officers understand my deadlines and respond very quickly to queries. CB Is there anything that press officers do that annoy you - or that they could be doing better/be doing to make your job easier? AJ Annoying things include: sending press releases as attachments, not saying what the release is about in the subject of the email, not including contact details of the researchers in the message; and calling to pitch a story after 3pm. Never call a daily newspaper journalist in the afternoon unless you've got the biggest breaking story of the year. If you're wondering if it's worth calling, it probably isn't. CB What is the best embargo for you and how soon in advance should press officers send out releases? AJ My heart sinks when I see "For Immediate Release" at the top of a message. Unless it's a bombshell, those stories never ever get into the paper. Embargoes are very useful a few days in advance as it helps us plan. Press releases sent, say, on Wednesday and embargoed for Sundays work very well. It's not a big secret that Sunday-for-Monday stories always stand a very good chance of getting coverage. CB What do you think of science journalism in the UK? AJ It's maturing - we've moved from just championing the latest discoveries into being a critical friend too, where we'll discuss implications and challenge scientists over the moral and practical implications of their work. CB What are the biggest challenges facing communication of science in the national news? AJ News is an imperfect way to discuss science but it's how most of us get our scientific information. The challenge is to make it relevant to people's lives without getting self-important. Bear in mind what science is competing with, news-wise, on a daily basis: stem cells might save all our lives one day but most people would still much rather read about Sienna Miller's new shoes. It doesn't mean we don't write about stem cells but stories needs to be angled so that they appeal to people who may not normally be interested. The importance of a story alone is usually not enough reason to cover it – sad but true.
|
|