In Chapter 19 of his Chicago Guide to Communicating Science, author Scott L. Montgomery broaches the subject of how the public has an interest in learning more about science and how scientific writers can cater to that interest. The chapter, "Science Writing and Science Talks: Communicating with and for the Public," highlights several techniques for writers to consider in accomplishing this goal. Some ideas that Montgomery recommends be considered are is the text easy to read? Does the text include helpful transitions? Is the writing fact-based but approachable? Does the lead statement effectively deliver a key message and even even more importantly does this statement generate interest in the reader to continue reading? Has the writer included writing devices such as metaphors and alliterations? In analyzing an article written for the public about a scientific topic, I chose “Ocean Life Eats Tons of Plastic—Here’s Why That Matters,” written by Laura Parker and published in National Geographic in August 16, 2017. Like the article I reviewed last week, this one is focused on microplastics and their impact on the environment. This article particularly focuses on microplastics in the food chain and its importance to humans. Parker leverages many of the techniques that Montgomery highlights in writing her article. An example of this is in her creative and engaging lead line “Anchovies are known more as a pickled pizza topping than for their crucial place in the marine food chain.” The author’s use of imagery and metaphors immediately gets the attention of the reader as well as creating intrigue for them to learn more. Parker immediately transitions to the main focus of the article in her statements that follow. “Now scientists have confirmed a disturbing new behavior by these tiny forage fish that could have larger implications for human health: anchovies are eating tiny pieces of ocean plastic, and because they, in turn, are eaten by larger fish, the toxins in those microplastics could be transferred to fish consumed by humans.” Another important device that Parker uses to create believability and logos while making her writing consumable by the public and fact-based is to quote reputable sources such as Matthew Savoca, a post-doctoral researcher at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Southwest Fisheries Science Center. “The scientific interest in this problem has absolutely exploded in the last five years,” Savoca says. “In the public eye, there is this idea that all the plastic out there is large pieces that we can identify. Toothbrushes, cigarette lighters, plastic bags. But the vast majority of ocean plastics are these small fragments. More than 90 percent are less than 10 millimeters long. It’s really small stuff.” It is this device of leveraging expert content and quotes that I intend to incorporate into my own writing for the final project. Doing so will help ensure that our communications plan for Save The Bay accomplishes its goals of educating the public about the criticality of the Microplastics problem while helping to make the concept more concrete for them so they know what their own behavioral change can do to help.
1 Comment
Author Scott L. Montgomery's uses Chapter Five, "Writing Very Well: Opportunities for Creativity and Elegance," in his Chicago Guide to Communicating Science to highlight various stylistic devices that can be used effectively in scientific writing or in writing about science for popular audiences. Some of the devices that he features are modulating sentence length and rhythm, posing questions, applying parallel structure at the sentence level, coining new terminology, and smooth transitions. Montgomery is careful to remind his readers that he believes “scientific writers must exhibit expressive restraint and must be relatively subtle in their creative act.” He does emphasize though that there is an opportunity for writers to add memorable or inventive phrasing, excellent organization and polish in their writing and focus on subtle transitions.
As a way to better understand some of Montgomery’s ideas, I reviewed “From sea to plate: how plastic got into our fish,” written by author Susan Smillie and published on Feb 14, 2017 in The Guardian, an online source for American and international news. This article is one that I found as part of my research for my final project. It is an example of science writing that has been written for popular audiences and focuses on the development, impact and prevalence of microplastics in the environment and in our food. Smillie uses many of the techniques that Montgomery references in writing her article. The best example of this is in her rather inventive opening phrase “It’s enough to make you cry over your moules frites” when referring to the rather serious topic of the volume of plastic fragments consumed by humans on an annual basis: “Scientists at Ghent University in Belgium recently calculated that shellfish lovers are eating up to 11,000 plastic fragments in their seafood each year.” Another of Montgomery’s devices that Smillie uses effectively is to pose questions. In fact, she leverages the opportunity not only to ask questions, but to challenge her readers to think about whether they are considering the right questions. “The question is no longer: are we eating plastic in our seafood? What scientists are urgently trying to establish is just how bad for us that is. Another question we might ask: how did we get here?” Some of the techniques that Montgomery highlights that I would incorporate into my scientific writing and my final project to ensure that it is both informative and engaging for my readers are to vary sentence length and rhythm, to challenge my readers to consider the impact of microplastics by posing direct and relevant questions, providing smooth transitions between concepts and using memorable examples. Minor Assignment 6: Sam Kean's "Caesar's Last Breath: Decoding the Secrets of the Air Around Us"3/18/2018 The first part of Caesar’s Last Breath introduces the concept of air along with its historical use and value. The author, Sam Kean, uses the introductory section of the book to help his audience better understand the atmosphere of the earth and how it changed and developed. The author uses descriptive language and metaphorical examples to make his writing very approachable, more appealing and more readily understood by scientists and non-scientists alike. What I find most fascinating about the writer’s style is how he weaves the idea of air and the history of our atmosphere into world history and evolutionary progress.
While the topic seems, at first, to be more relevant to scientific audiences, I believe that Kean’s audience is likely to be more broad-based and include both those individuals that have in-depth scientific knowledge of the topic as well as those that have little to no scientific background at all. Kean’s decision to use a conversational, story-telling approach helps him to be more effective in getting this point across and keeping his readers engaged, despite their previous knowledge of the concepts he presents. The tone of the book is conversational and even humorous at times, but the underlying message that is presented right from the introduction is that the air we breathe should not be taken for granted. I believe that his purpose in writing the book was to help his audiences better understand the importance of his topic and to make his readers stop and think about the history and processes of the earth. Kean’s ability to very clearly explain complex concepts in a way that is approachable and memorable underscores the effort he put into ensuring that his writing would have a strong and positive impact on his audience. Kean leverages his skill at storytelling and his use of explicit and concrete examples to weave concepts together to help make his topic more relevant to his readers. One of the most intriguing facets of his writing me is how uses these writing techniques to addresses the issue of the “curse of knowledge.” My personal writing style also tends to lean more towards conversational and explanatory examples. I think that by leveraging Kean’s approach and my own style in my final project, I will be able to use details and events to help make his more complex ideas consumable. If I have a chance to ask Sam Kean questions about his writing of this book, I would like to ask him about his writing process. I would start by asking questions such as: What caused you to write the book? Was there a moment when you thought, this is a really great idea and I’m going to write about it using these examples? Or, did you start with a rough idea and figure it out as you went along? |
AuthorHi! I am Collin Barker and I am a Marine Biology Major at Roger Williams University, an avid reader and fish keeper. To learn more about me check out my About page. Archives
May 2018
Categories |