Wed, 14 Aug 2002 -- Media Matters No. 13:
Are you media-shy?

Many researchers distrust -- even fear -- the media. When we ask them about what, specifically, they fear, we learn that what they worry about most is misrepresentation -- and what this will do to their standing among people in the research community. Some worry that, even if their information is not misrepresented, other researchers will see them as "grandstanding."

In the minds of many researchers, there DOES seems to be a larger potential downside than upside to dealing with media. Neither NIDRR nor academia gives credit for mass media dissemination in the review or tenure process; what counts is peer-reviewed journals. So, says the researcher, why bother with mass media? While it is true that publication -- or simply coverage -- in academic journals builds the knowledge base among the research community, it really doesn't address the needs of the population at large. How does the public ever find out about the research? Is it important for the public to even know about the research? That's a good question, and we'll take it up in a future Media Matters.

Most researchers simply do not want to be in the limelight. Many believe that mass media attention will be harmful to their careers when they come up for the next cycle of review; that their research peers will think less of them if they have been in the news too often. Whether true or not, it has a chilling effect on the desire to speak too often to reporters.

There's also a "we'll serve no research before its time" mentality. Media wants it now; researchers would rather massage it for a longer time. Unfortunately, some research actually gets stale waiting for "its time." The question that needs answering is this: What is wrong with letting the public know about research?

Even if you don't mind talking to a reporter, between the government funding source's concerns and one's university or organizational vetting processes, the ability to actually talk freely with a reporter can simply become compromised. Researchers who want to say more may likely feel an impulse to stop short of the story, or make sure their quotes are inoffensive. The result is that what's said comes across as stilted or canned, and doesn't end up making a good story. It's a Catch-22.

In future Media Matters, we'll look at several of these problems, and at whether there are any solutions.

Next time: Are there any advantages to working with mass media at all, then?

More Media Matters