by Lesley Evans Ogden
At the recent Canadian Science Writers Association Meeting in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, two gurus of science journalism, Tom Hayden and Peter Calamai shared their sage advice on the art of turning research into a story. While their advice was given to and intended for science writers, many of their tips will be useful and germane to nonfiction writing generally, so I thought I would share it here.
Peter Calamai’s 10 maxims:
Just because you’re fascinated with poisonous cone snails in Australia doesn’t mean your reader is, explains Calamai. So keep your story to the point, and don’t overindulge by making your reader the unwilling recipient of all you know about the subject.
To be a top level science journalist or science communicator, “being a PhD level scientist is neither necessary… or sufficient,” says Hayden. It’s one perfectly viable pathway of many, he suggests.
Calamai’s response? “See this? This is a red pen. Number six… gone.”
Personally, reading more good writing is something wish I had more time to do. When I do have time, I have found the “Best American…” compendium series, which exists for genres including short stories, essays, mystery stories, travel writing, sports, and science and nature writing, to be excellent inspiration for high quality work. It’s produced annually, and incidentally, it’s too bad there is (as yet) no Canadian equivalent.
10. Sweat the small stuff.
Make sure names are spelled correctly. Double check what people tell you. Never trust a source on a number [or fact]. Always check it. “Triple check,” says Calamai.
“The maxims, the pointers, the tips -- watching the work that an expert has done, that all has its value, but I think the greatest value for getting better, and almost certainly for getting started, comes in working with real words on real pages,” says Hayden.
To Calamai’s tips, Hayden added a few more (and my summary here doesn’t do justice to capturing them all):
Each paragraph should start with one very clear statement of what it’s about. The occasional longer or more complex sentence is okay, suggests Hayden, but you first need to “earn your stripes” from your reader. Returning to the train analogy, he says “you can get people to follow you along on a very complex train” so long as you keep one idea per sentence and “link, link, link.” The “mental Sudoku” you have to do is to get them in the right order, he adds.
As a parting thought he adds, “find the most interesting thing that your story is about, and lead with that.”
~
Peter Calamai has been an adjunct research professor at Carleton University since 2001. He worked for over four decades in Canadian daily newspapers as a news correspondent at home and overseas with the Southam newspapers and The Ottawa Citizen. From 1998 to 2008 he was the national science reporter for The Toronto Star. He now is a communications consultant, freelance writer and editor based in Ottawa. In 2014, he was reportedly “gobsmacked” to receive the Order of Canada for his work.
Thomas Hayden directs the Environmental Communication Master of Arts program at Stanford University. He has been an oceanographer, staffer at Newsweek, and senior editor at US News & World Report. He also works as a freelance science journalist and author, and is coeditor of The Science Writer’s Handbook: Everything You Need to Know to Pitch, Publish, and Prosper in the Digital Age. He originally hails from Saskatoon.
~
Lesley Evans Ogden is a former scientist turned journalist-producer based in Port Moody, BC. The columnist of Deception at BBC Earth, she is also a regular contributor at New Scientist, Earth Touch, and Natural History, and recently began dipping her toes into documentary work for radio and TV. She has just completed a two year term as a Board Member of the Canadian Science Writer’s Association. Say hi on Twitter @ljevanso
Next Post: Off The Wire: News for the Canadian media freelancer July 7-13
Previous Post: Off The Wire: News for the Canadian media freelancer June 30-July 6
Nicely captured, Lesley! Always a pleasure to be associated with Peter—and you.
Thanks for pointing that out, Jay. Clearly I need to pay closer attention to Peter’s point number 10! Noted, and will make sure the spelling is fixed ASAP.
Also, I think that controversial point number 6 could occupy a whole discussion session. Clearly there are more points to be made on that, and there are pros and cons of graduate training as the jumping off point into journalism. From my point of view, like Tom said, it’s just one possible path—not necessarily better or worse than any other path into science communication or journalism. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
And thanks Tom for the very interesting and well articulated points at that session!
Very good reminders for all writing. Much appreciated. My favourite is number one. A story well told will always be readable. I love it when a topic i never considered before leaps off a page and captures me.
Thanks Rebecca!
Jay Ingram July 8, 2015 - 8:33 AM
Re; point #10: Ivan’s last name is spelled Semeniuk.
Re: the controversial point 6. reinstate it. If indeed ‘credentialism’ is on the rise doesn’t make it right. I’d like someone to show me exactly how an advanced degree can somehow replace good and deep research.