Careers in Science Journalism and Writing

Abstract

Science journalists cover some of the most complex, exciting, and important issues of our day, ranging from the impacts of climate change to emerging infectious diseases. They use words, sounds, images, and graphics to create compelling stories about science that appear in newspapers and magazines, in print and online, on the radio and TV, and in podcasts and videos. The field is undergoing rapid change, which presents both challenges and opportunities. The migration of readers and advertising to the internet and digital platforms has led to declining sales of print publications. This means that jobs are now scarce in traditional print media, but that there are growing opportunities to produce digital content.

Science writers use words, sounds, images, and graphics to communicate complex and important scientific issues to broad audiences. Job opportunities for science writers continue to grow, particularly in the online realm.

Science journalism as a career is hard work and is unlikely to make you rich; it is also varied, fascinating, and rewarding. It combines the creativity of writing and media with the intellectual fascination of the scientific field. It is very satisfying to have your story read or watched by perhaps tens of thousands of people, and even—at its widest reach—have an influence on policy or on society at large. It is also an important profession, because it involves investigating, analyzing, and communicating issues that are crucial to society, such as pollution and human health. There is arguably an urgent need for outstanding science journalists and communicators who can help translate and analyze these issues, as well as hold science and scientists to account.

If all of this sounds appealing, then the best way to take a step into science journalism is to have a go at it. Write something, record some audio, and shoot some video. Although there is no set route into the field, many people in the United States do attend science journalism programs, which can help build skills, establish contacts, and open doors. It is competitive, but very talented people can find a unique and highly rewarding career in science journalism.

What Is Science Journalism?

Science journalists and writers cover subjects ranging from contentious developments in embryonic stem cell medicine, to the discovery of planets in remote solar systems, to arcane advances in quantum physics and gene regulation. Science journalists also provide analysis, context, and perspective by, for example, exploring a discovery's social and political implications.

Science journalism serves as a major route by which sometimes-complex scientific issues are communicated to a broad audience. Journalists cover issues in which science impacts on society and policy, such as climate change, energy, pollution, genetically modified crops, medicine, nuclear proliferation, and natural disasters. Journalists also hold scientists and the scientific process up to scrutiny. They examine questionable statistics or overinflated claims; they investigate scientific misconduct, conflicts of interest, and ethical breaches. At their best, they can be cool, objective critics of science.

In many ways, science journalism is very similar to research. Journalists, like scientists, find an aspect of science that fascinates them and that they may know little about. Journalists ask questions and look to evidence to provide answers. But rather than dedicating several months or years to researching a question, a news journalist spends somewhere between two hours and two weeks—depending on the deadline—researching it and turning it into a story using writing, sound, or video. Then—unlike some academic science—the story is quickly published or broadcast and, with any luck, a significant number of people read or watch it. Some of those people may comment that they like it or hate it, or that it had an impact on their thinking, or even on their life or on science policy. (By then, of course, our news journalist will be researching and writing about something else.)

For the journalist, all this makes for an endlessly fascinating, constantly changing, and intellectually stretching profession. For the audience, it hopefully makes for an enlightening, stimulating, informative, influential, and entertaining article or program.

The Spectrum of Science Communication

There is a wide range of careers involving science writing and communication. Within that, many people in the profession make a distinction between straight science journalists and those who communicate science for the purpose of publicity. Those in the latter category might call themselves science writers, science communicators, science publicists, or public information officers (PIOs). This article uses the term science publicists.

Science publicists typically work for universities, research institutes, museums, government agencies, charitable bodies, or private foundations—any organization with an interest in science. They typically write, or produce other media content, about the science and scientists being supported by the organization for which they work. This content may appear on the institution's website and in its print publications, or form part of a press release sent out to the media. This is largely done to promote the organization and its work.

Science journalists, by contrast, typically work for newspapers, magazines, TV and radio stations, digital news outlets, and other commercial or not-for-profit media organizations. They conventionally do more reporting, critique, and analysis of the subject for their readers than a science publicist.

The following example illustrates the difference. Imagine that scientists at Prestige University (PU) are about to publish a paper in a top-tier journal reporting a link between a type of cancer and a common viral infection. Science writers in the communication office of PU put together a press release summarizing the work and send it out to various media. They also interview the scientists and write a story about the paper and its potential implications, which is then published on PU's news website. The aim is to increase the profile of PU and communicate its findings widely.

The journalist who wants to cover the story, however, typically digs a bit deeper. They call the scientists who did the work, as well as a handful of other researchers in the field, including the author's main competitor, and a patient advocacy group. (Is the link plausible? Do the data look sound? Is the interpretation reasonable? Who funded the work? How far is it from being clinically useful?) The journalist might end up writing an article saying that the work is being embraced by patient communities but raising eyebrows among scientists, who question the rigor of the data and analysis. The journalist is writing about the same paper as the science publicist, but it is reported and analytical.

Some people view science publicity as a different—and even slightly lesser—pursuit than science journalism because it can have less depth of analysis and the author has less freedom to write objectively. (“You don't own your story,” says writer and author Ann Finkbeiner, who served as Director of the science-medical writing graduate program at Johns Hopkins University.) The boundaries between journalism and publicity are increasingly blurred, but it is still worth having an appreciation of the difference. In this article, however, the terms science journalist and writer are used fairly interchangeably to cover the spectrum of science journalism, publicity, and communication.

This article attempts to outline a few important things to know before taking the leap into science journalism as a career: what science journalists do, how to dip a toe in the water, and what qualities and skills it takes to succeed. It focuses on writing about science, because that is the area that I know best; it also focuses on the United States, although much of the content is also relevant to those elsewhere in the world. In researching this article, I interviewed the leaders or directors of several major science journalism and writing programs in the United States: at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), University of California–Santa Cruz, Johns Hopkins University, Boston University, New York University, and the University of Wisconsin–Madison, as well as a handful of other experts in the field.

The Changing Ecosystem of Science Journalism

Journalism is in a state of rapid transition—a bust following a boom. In 1978, the launch of The New York Times science section kicked off a decade-long expansion of science journalism. Many other newspapers followed suit, and several popular science news magazines, such as Discover, started up.

Today, the landscape is different and in flux. The New York Times and The Washington Post are unusual in maintaining a weekly section dedicated to science, although other major national and regional papers still have reporters devoted to covering science, health, technology, or the environment. A cluster of major science news magazines caters to the science-interested public, and they are increasingly focused on digital content. These include Scientific American, Science News, New Scientist, Wired, MIT Technology Review, and National Geographic. There are also well-known specialist publications that maintain news sections and whose main audience is working scientists and engineers, such as Science, Nature, The Scientist, IEEE Spectrum, and Chemical and Engineering News.

The reason for changes in science media lies in the internet and digital publishing platforms, which are causing a profound and rapid change in the media as a whole. A 2013 report by the Pew Research Center showed that in 2004, 24% of people surveyed had consumed the previous day's news from the internet; by 2012, that figure had risen to 39% and some 50% had consumed news from some kind of digital source. Social media such as Facebook and Twitter are now many people's primary source for news. The “old” media—including newspapers, magazines, books, TV, radio, and anything else predating the internet—is sometimes referred to as legacy media.

All of this means that print circulations of newspapers and magazines are decreasing as readers migrate to the internet and mobile devices to consume their news; at the same time, print advertising revenues have dropped. With readers and income decreasing, many print outlets for science journalism have shrunk, or closed. According to one analysis, the number of U.S. newspapers with a science section dropped from 95 to 34 between 1989 and 2005. Of the roughly 2300 members of the National Association for Science Writers (NASW), the professional body for science writers and journalists in the United States, only 3% were staff newspaper reporters in 2011. (In Europe, decreasing circulations are also creating problems, but the situation is not quite as acute; in the United Kingdom, for example, there has been a slight decrease in the number of science journalists since 2005.)

The internet and other forms of digital media are also leading to a proliferation of new outlets for science news. There is a growing ecosystem of specialist science news websites. The internet also partly explains the expansion of science media and communication offices run by research agencies (such as the National Institutes of Health or NASA), universities, research foundations (such as the Michael J. Fox Foundation, Simons Foundation, and others), and other science-related organizations (such as the American Geophysical Union, American Chemical Society, and Society for Neuroscience, to name just a few). Rather than writing news releases, as they might have done in the past, these organizations reach their audience directly by writing and publishing their own material. Some nonprofit organizations are running substantial science news outlets in their own right.

Meanwhile, the broadcast media have been more stable. Several established outlets such as Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) and National Public Radio (NPR) produce science news and programs, as do smaller production companies. There is also a diverse, thriving world of science podcasts. Some of these are produced by scientists; some are spin-offs from other media; many break with the model of standard science journalism and are trying innovative forms of communication, exemplified by NPR's Radiolab. Newspapers and magazines are increasingly producing podcasts or short videos, creating another hybrid between old and new media.

JOBS: WHAT DO SCIENCE JOURNALISTS DO?

Reporter, Editor, Staffer, Freelancer, Author

Many people in journalism today started out as reporters. Reporters find stories, interview sources, and then write them up for publication in a newspaper, magazine, or other outlet. They write short news stories over a period of hours or days—and longer features, which can take weeks or months to report and write. Most journalists have a specialty, or “beat,” such as biomedicine or physical sciences. Broadcast journalists tell the same stories using scripts, audio, and video.

Staff reporters are typically employed full time by a media organization. Freelancers, by contrast, effectively run their own business, writing or producing content for many outlets. Staff positions provide a steady wage and benefits and can be relatively secure (depending on the financial health of the employer, of course); on the other hand, staff reporters answer to editors who can tell them to drop everything at 6:00 p.m. and cover a breaking story. Freelancers have more autonomy to pursue stories that interest them and to manage their own time, but they often have less financial security and may have to work harder to get the attention of an editor. There is a thriving community of freelance science journalists and writers.

Editors oversee the process. They typically commission stories from staff and freelance reporters. They might commission stories they have identified, or ones the reporters have pitched to them. An editor will edit the story, which might involve anything from tweaking a few words to rewriting most of the piece. They also oversee the printed pages or the website, coordinate pictures and graphics, and plan special issues or collections—themed around gene editing, human migration, or single-cell biology, to point to a few examples from Nature. Copy editors check stories for accuracy and grammar, after editing and before publication. Digital editors or digital content managers typically oversee the posting of content and curate the site; they might also be dealing with a news organization's social media streams and other efforts to engage the audience.

A communication office at a university might have a similar structure, made up of science writers and editors, overseen by a head of communications. These often have the advantage of being secure, relatively well-paid jobs.

Salaries for journalism and writing positions vary enormously: A junior reporter might earn $20,000–$50,000 per year; a senior reporter at a national newspaper or a senior magazine editor could earn more than $100,000 per year. Freelancers typically earn a minimum of $1 per word, but word rates can be considerably more and depend on the publication and on a writer's experience.

A Word on Blogging and Social Media

The last decade saw a rapid proliferation of science blogs, some of which became part of major blogging networks—such as those hosted by Scientific American (see http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/), Wired (see http://www.wired.com/category/science-blogs/), and National Geographic (see http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com). The blogging ecosystem is a diverse, interesting mix between old and new media. Scientists are blogging for themselves and on newspaper or magazine websites, and blogs have also helped to develop and launch many science journalists.

Bloggers write online about what interests them, without having to answer to bossy editors or stick to word limits. Easy-to-use platforms such as WordPress mean that anyone can quickly start a blog. Some bloggers report their entries and write much like a journalist; others are known for opinionated commentary. Some blogs are very high quality and build major followings; the boundaries between blogs and conventional opinion columns are increasingly blurred.

Twitter has become an essential part of many science journalists' toolbox as they find it an invaluable way to find stories and contacts and to communicate directly with their audience. Some journalists tweet prolifically, build up a huge following, and use the medium to help establish a reputation and increase their readership. News sites run Twitter, Facebook, and other social media feeds to discuss and promote content and to engage their audience. There are all kinds of other experiments in digital science media going on all the time.

However, it's almost impossible to make a living from blogging and tweeting alone. Most writers blog for free because they love to write, it helps to build a reputation and online presence, and because it allows them to interact closely with their readers. Some bloggers who are part of the big science blogging networks are paid a small amount, based on their number of page views.

The Multifunctional, Multimedia Journalist

The boundaries between different roles in journalism are blurred and people move from one to another. A freelance writer might run his or her own blog, Tweet avidly, write for newspapers and magazines, and also pen books. A video journalist might record a story, and then produce a written version to accompany it on the web. When considering a story, editors increasingly decide whether it makes most sense to cover it as written news, or using video or audio. All of this is leading to a demand for multimedia journalists who are comfortable producing content using text, graphics, digital media, audio, and video—although most journalists end up specializing to some extent.

The Good, Bad, and Ugly of Working in Science Journalism

Science journalism is never dull, because journalists move onto new stories quickly and are always learning. It is exciting to be writing about the frontiers of research and to see the big questions. It can also be very satisfying to work hard on something and know that many people will read or watch it, and perhaps be influenced by it or respond to it. Many journalists build name recognition and a reputation among their readers. Some journalists, presenters, and book authors achieve more widespread fame: for example, Rebecca Skloot, whose book The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks topped the The New York Times bestseller list, and freelancer Carl Zimmer, who writes regularly for The New York Times, has written a string of books and has built an extensive following on social media.

On the downside, journalism can be stressful. Journalists work to constant, immovable deadlines. They may have as little as an hour to write a story. They have to quickly get to grips with complex subjects about which they may know very little, and translate those into more accessible language. They have to file well-written copy, on time, having interviewed sources and double-checked the facts. “The day by day journalism is to get it out quick, and get it out fast,” says Marcia Bartusiak, Professor of the Practice of the Graduate Program in Science Writing at MIT.

Many journalists who have held onto their jobs during the recent hard times are also facing increasing workloads. In a survey of science journalists for Nature in 2009, 59% of science journalists said the number of pieces they worked on in a week had increased in the last five years (Brumfiel 2009). Journalists who were once dedicated to print are now asked to produce content for online news, podcasts, and social media. A 2009 report on the state of science journalists in the UK found that, faced with limited time, journalists were becoming overreliant on easy-to-digest press releases written by science publicists at journals, universities, and other organizations (see Williams and Clifford 2008). They can find it hard to carve out time to pursue an exclusive, investigative story or feature. “The critical nature of science journalism is blunted,” says Andrew Williams at Cardiff University, UK, who wrote the report and studies science media. “There is a corrosive dependency on sources because of the availability of well-crafted PR,” he says.

SKILLS AND QUALIFICATIONS

There is no set route into science journalism. Some people in the field today attended a journalism program, and later specialized in science. Many others went from science to journalism. A fair few gave up on their PhD partway through when they realized that writing was for them, and never looked back. (Science journalist and author Ed Yong compiled an excellent collection of minibiographies from science writers about how they got into the field [see http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2010/07/29/on-the-origin-of-science-writers/].) At Nature, the news team contains a mix of people with all these backgrounds.

In the past, many journalists entered the profession by finding a junior reporter position at a newspaper or other media organization. They learned their skills on the job and worked their way up. (That is what I did.) A few people still get in this way, but the contraction of so many media organizations means that those entry-level positions are highly competitive and hard to come by.

Many people coming into the field today have attended a science writing or journalism course. There are more than 50 courses in the United States that train students in communicating science to the public and a growing number in other countries. A subset of these is focused on professional science journalism, in which students learn essential skills such as finding stories and reporting, and gain experience in a range of media, from writing a lengthy feature article to reporting, shooting, and producing a short documentary. “You learn the field systematically and get all the tools at the outset,” says Douglas Starr, codirector of the science journalism program at Boston University.

Is It Necessary to Take a Science Journalism Course?

It is not essential to have completed a science journalism course, but it can ease your way into a competitive field.

Course directors acknowledge that some people have no need for a postgraduate course. These include highly motivated students who have some hands-on experience in science and are ambitious enough to have secured science journalism internships, people who start out blogging or freelancing and establish a reputation and a writing career on the back of that work, and a handful of working scientists who are also lucky enough to be highly gifted writers. These people can skip further training.

For everyone else—scientists without any “clippings” of their written or recorded work, for example—a science journalism course has advantages. As well as building skills and confidence, a course helps open up a network of contacts. For example, many science journalism programs have established links with science media organizations and help set up internships there. (Nature has found a string of talented interns from the University of California–Santa Cruz [UC Santa Cruz] science communication program and others; graduates from the Science, Health, and Environmental Reporting Program [SHERP] at New York University [NYU] tend to dominate the internships in New York.) These help to make contacts for future freelancing and open the door to jobs.

The disadvantages of a science journalism course are the time, commitment, and expense. Such programs can cost tens of thousands of dollars for tuition alone. The course directors strongly recommend that prospective students carefully research the program and examine whether and where recent graduates have landed jobs. “Find one that reflects the reality of the marketplace that exists now and 10 to 20 years from now,” says Dan Fagin, who heads SHERP. Competition for the top science journalism courses is also stiff: The MIT program, for example, gets some 70–80 applications for eight places.

Do You Need a PhD?

No. It is more important to be a talented reporter or writer (see discussion of skills and qualities, below) than to have a PhD or postdoctoral experience. But having one will not do you any harm, and in some cases might help.

Some of the top science journalism courses do look for in-depth experience in science. Entry to the UC–Santa Cruz program requires at least six months research or professional experience and about two-thirds of those entering the program have a master's or PhD. NYU likes to see significant experience in science, such as a science major or a master's degree, in students wanting to attend SHERP.

Having research experience can provide you with expertise in a particular field. This could give you confidence interviewing scientists—and having a niche, such as infectious diseases or genomics, can be an advantage when editors are looking to assign a story. “It's really important to establish yourself as a source of information that can't be easily obtained elsewhere,” says Fagin. “Make yourself the go-to person in a particular subject.” Research experience can also give you insight into the research process and community that you will be writing about.

On the other hand, a PhD is often no help at all. Many of the best science journalists have little to no research experience. The research from a PhD quickly becomes out of date. (My PhD in developmental biology was of little help when writing about the science leadership of Harvard University, for example). I hardly ever advertise my PhD to people that I interview, because it is usually irrelevant to the topic I am writing about. It can also cause them to assume I know more than I do, when I actually need them to explain their work to me from scratch.

What Skills and Qualities Do You Need?

To be successful in science journalism, there are many qualities that are more important than any qualification. When I receive a story pitch—a note from a freelance journalist outlining a story they would like to write for Nature—I do not look at the writer's resume or academic qualifications. I read the pitch to see if it is a great idea, well written and researched, and of interest to Nature's readers. I also look to see if the author has written outstanding feature stories that demonstrate that he or she can carry out high-quality reporting and writing.

The directors of the science journalism courses—experts at screening through applications—say that they look for some of the following skills and attributes in aspiring science journalists.

1. A talent for writing, with an appreciation of the difference between academic and science writing. When course directors read application letters, essays, and clippings they look for a spark that makes the writing stand out. “I look for that flair of voice,” says Robert Irion, former director of the UC–Santa Cruz science communication program. “It might be raw and untamed but there needs to be a spark—rather than a dry academic voice.”

2. Evidence that an applicant has tried writing or journalism by, for example, blogging; writing for an institutional newsletter, website, or local newspaper; or taking a class (see next section, Getting a Foot in the Door).

3. Evidence that a candidate has carefully studied the field and is committed to a career in it. “We want people who have done their research and feel certain that this is really what they want to do,” says Fagin.

4. Some life experience. Many course directors say they prefer students who have done more than trodden the straight and narrow academic path. “If they've lived and experienced the world then it leads to better journalism,” says Irion, who says that most of his students had had challenging jobs or traveled abroad.

5. Other qualities that make a good reporter and writer: a sense of what makes a science story; a fearlessness in talking to new people (journalists have to cold call the people they want to interview); the ability to quickly read and synthesize a mass of scientific information; a healthy skepticism; and the ability to chase a story down. “They need a certain type of sharkiness, to go after a story and get it,” Finkbeiner says.

GETTING A FOOT IN THE DOOR

Is Science Journalism for You?

You may already have a strong feeling that science writing or journalism is for you. It is fairly common to meet science journalists who started out doing a PhD or studying science in some capacity, but felt that they were out of place, lacked a passion for bench research, or found (as I did) the focus on one sliver of science unsatisfying. “When our class gets in the room for the first time and look at each other, there is this spark of recognition—you too?” says Starr. “When they find us there is sometimes a sense of relief: at last I can be me.” Irion says that another sign of a wannabe journalist is an insatiable appetite for news. “If you pick up Nature and Science and scan the front of the magazine before the back, it's a good sign you want to communicate.”

However, few people feel comfortable making major career choices on the basis of intuition alone. There are many other ways to communicate science, such as teaching, which might suit you better. So the best way to work out if science writing or journalism is a good career choice is simply to try it. Take small, practical steps that allow you to try out a little writing, or other media, without sucking up all your time. You could start a blog. You might ask at your institution's communication office if you could write for them, or record an interview. You might write for the university magazine, newspaper or website, or volunteer to write for a newspaper in your town. Perhaps you could sign up for an evening class in nonfiction writing. Any of these activities can help you get a feel for what is involved and help you work out whether you like it. Whether you end up applying to a science journalism course or for a job, these will also demonstrate your commitment and provide you with some work to show.

Aside from this, there are other ways to start informing yourself about the industry, and integrating yourself into it. Read newspapers and magazines voraciously. Research the field, by talking to people who are already working in it about how they started out, and what it is like. Most science journalists love what they do, and are happy to talk to others about it.

There is a thriving community of scientists, science communicators, journalists, and others passionate about science that is very active online, and integrating yourself into this community is an excellent doorway into the field. Twitter and other social media encourage anyone to join the conversation and establish a presence for themselves online, if they have something interesting to say.

At the minimum, you should get online, become familiar with science media outlets and the science journalism community, and dive into Twitter, Facebook, and other social media if you have not already.

Internships

Science journalism and writing internships, which are offered by many science media organizations, are an excellent way to gain experience and contacts. Some of these are advertised on the NASW jobs list. Competition for some of the most prized internships can be stiff, however, and you may be up against top candidates coming out of science journalism programs. The annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)—one of the big professional get-togethers for science writers—hosts an internship fair for recruiters and those seeking internships who are members of the NASW. There is also a mentoring program at the meeting which pairs up students with working journalists or science publicists.

There are other opportunities to get a taste of the media. The AAAS Mass Media Science & Engineering Fellows Program offers 10-week summer placements at media organizations for graduate and postgraduate science students (see http://www.aaas.org/programs/education/MassMedia/). In the U.K., the British Science Association Media Fellowships provide similar opportunities (see http://www.britishscienceassociation.org/media-fellows).

Does the World Need More Science Journalists?

No one really knows, particularly with such rapid change in the way news is being consumed. With so many U.S. science writing programs but a contracting workforce in legacy media, some science journalists do worry that the job market is saturated or heading that way. Even so, many course directors say that the majority of their graduates are going on to get good jobs within months of graduating. The best science journalism courses are transparent about exactly where all of their graduates are working, so make sure that you do your research.

CAREER PROGRESSION AND THE WAY OUT

The career choices and paths of recent graduates from science journalism programs reveal where the employment opportunities now lie. (You can get a more detailed picture of this by looking at the course websites, many of which show the paths of their alumni.)

According to the course leaders, only a small fraction of graduates are now finding work as science journalists in newspapers. “You can count on one hand the number of jobs available at newspapers for students,” says Irion. (Employment at magazines, TV, and radio has been more stable.) The shortfall from print, says Irion, is made up by online news sources. Some are writing for the digital news operations of established magazines such as New Scientist or Scientific American; others are finding jobs in smaller, more specialized news websites.

Most course leaders said that around half of their graduates find work in science publicist positions in universities, research institutions, and science-related organizations. And a substantial fraction of graduates are making it as freelance writers, by producing material for established science news providers and the many online outlets. Of graduates from the MIT science writing program since 2003, approximately half are supporting themselves as freelancers.

Like entry points, career paths in science journalism vary. My news colleagues from Nature have gone on to diverse positions in TV, radio, national newspapers, and research foundations, and several have become excellent book authors and successful freelance writers. Science journalists who are looking for variety during their career can take on freelance work or write books on the side. Some also take up journalism fellowships, which offer bursaries to pursue in-depth projects.

The traditional divide between promotional and journalistic writing can be hard to cross, however. Someone in a promotional position could well find it hard to do freelance journalism on the side, as there is a perceived conflict of interest in, for example, reporting on the type of science that is being carried out at the institution that is paying your salary. Finkbeiner warns those who choose a science publicist position to only remain in it for a short time if they are interested in returning to journalism. In Finkbeiner's experience, “anyone who stays there for more than a few years stays there for good.”

An individual with a broad understanding of science who can also write or speak lucidly about it, has skills that can prove valuable in many career paths. In fact, these are some of the qualities that make for an outstanding researcher—should you decide to return to the bench. “There's nothing lost—a scientist who learns to be a communicator is a good thing,” says Deborah Blum, a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist and professor of journalism at the University of Wisconsin–Madison.

BOX 1.

My Experience

When I was about 15 years old and at British high school, I completed a career questionnaire. I filled in answers to numerous questions about my likes and dislikes, which were sent off and plugged into a computer. About a week later, my ideal career came back: quarry manager. (Yes, that is someone who manages quarries.)

This did not really appeal, so instead I took a pretty conventional path into science. I went to the University of Cambridge to study Natural Sciences, and specialized in genetics. Toward the end of the course, I still did not know what to do. I had an interview with MI5, the British Intelligence Agency, but I cannot tell you much about that. I took a year off, continuing my Cambridge undergraduate laboratory project for a few months and then traveled in Central America. Then I started a PhD in developmental genetics at the University of Edinburgh, an amazing city with grim weather.

It is no reflection on my excellent supervisors, but I did not have the passion that it really takes to succeed in research. I had to hold the edges of my chair to keep from running out of seminars. I had wondered whether writing or some other form of science communication was for me—but, lucky for me, my PhD studies and living expenses were fully funded by the UK's Medical Research Council, and I figured having a PhD would not hurt if I eventually took a different route.

And that is what I did. Toward the end of my PhD I was offered an internship at New Scientist magazine. (I had to write a trial article and I swotted up like crazy before my interview so that I was armed with story ideas.) But I was told that I had to start the internship immediately, before I had finished writing up my PhD, so I turned it down. Instead, I wrote the thesis and joined London's Science Museum, where I wrote educational materials and eventually got to work on a fast-turnaround “science news” exhibition. Meanwhile, I had also developed the confidence to pitch and write a few freelance news stories for New Scientist.

Those clippings were enough to get me a position as an online reporter at Nature in 2001, when it was just looking to expand its online news team. I was thrilled and terrified to get the job. The deadlines were relentless and I lived on adrenaline for at least a year. (On the other hand, I could now walk out of a dull conference seminar without looking back.) After 18 months, I moved to Nature's New York office, to continue reporting there.

I went to New York for what I expected to be two years, and came back to London after eight years, with two children and running the features section of Nature. This meant that I commission, edit, and oversee the feature-length stories in the magazine. I will be honest; editing features for a weekly magazine is more compatible with family life than writing news to daily deadlines. But I have also come to love writing and editing longer-form stories because they allow me to explore subjects and people in depth, and spend more time crafting the words. I have been fortunate enough to pick up a few journalism awards for my own writing, and I embarked on a book that spun off from one of my Nature features.

As an editor, I have the advantage of seeing the bigger picture: commissioning stories that cover all areas of science research, science policy, and the scientific community. At Nature, I am also surrounded by an incredible brain trust of people who know science inside out. It is never less than really hard work, and never dull. But like many editors, I struggle to find time to write. I am really happiest when I have finished reporting a story, close my notes, and sit down to write it. However, it is possible I would have loved managing a quarry more. You never know.

BOX 2.

Ten Dos and Don'ts

Some condensed tips for those wanting to enter the profession.

1. Do get some practical experience in science journalism and writing: Start a blog, write for your institution's communication office, take an evening class.

2. Do research the field, the job prospects, and the challenges, so that you have an accurate idea of what you are getting into, before quitting science. And do research graduate schools, if you decide to take a course.

3. Do not read a science article and assume that writing it was easy. You do not know what went into reporting that story—sometimes many months of work.

4. Do read voraciously. Work out your favorite science writers, magazines, and media outlets.

5. Do join the NASW. This active professional society of science journalists and communicators has lots of excellent information, resources, an annual meeting, discussions lists, and a great jobs list that includes internships. Other excellent groups include the Society of Environmental Journalists and the Association of Health Care Journalists.

6. Do not assume you need a PhD, a Master's, or specialist training in science. Talent and hard work are more important.

7. Do get online and use social media to become familiar with the community.

8. If you apply to a science journalism course, do write a beautifully worded application and check it carefully for accuracy. Sloppiness or spelling mistakes will not do. Do not send in a research paper or anything written for academic colleagues.

9. Do not assume you are going to educate people about science, or that you are a cheerleader for science.

10. Do persevere, if this is what you really want to do.