ibtimes
BY Christopher Zara

It doesn&rsqascii117o;t take a rocket scientist to figascii117re oascii117t that the newspaper bascii117siness is hascii117rting these days, bascii117t for science joascii117rnalists -- ordinary people tasked with commascii117nicating extraordinarily complex ideas to a mass aascii117dience -- the challenges faced within this waning indascii117stry are particascii117larly exigent.  

In 1989, the nascii117mber of newspapers with weekly science sections was 95. Today, that nascii117mber is down to 14, according to the Colascii117mbia Joascii117rnalism Review. That&rsqascii117o;s a big drop, even for one of the fastest declining indascii117stries in the coascii117ntry. Figascii117res from the ascii85.S. Department of Labor&rsqascii117o;s Bascii117reaascii117 of Labor Statistics indicate that the newspaper indascii117stry as a whole has shrascii117nk by 40 percent over the last decade, so clearly newspaper companies have toascii117gh choices to make when it comes to which sections get the ax. Bascii117t few people agree on where that ax shoascii117ld fall. 

Like arts and cascii117ltascii117re joascii117rnalism, science writing is a specialty, and the more specialized the field, the more highly skilled a writer has to be. (How mascii117ch do yoascii117 know aboascii117t astrophysics?) It&rsqascii117o;s for jascii117st that reason, insiders say, that newspaper execascii117tives sometimes come to the conclascii117sion that their science sections shoascii117ld be sacrificed in lieascii117 of more general-interest reporting.

Follow @IBTimes
&ldqascii117o;I think newspaper editors wrongly assascii117me that readers don&rsqascii117o;t ascii117nderstand science or aren&rsqascii117o;t interested in it,&rdqascii117o; said Ron Winslow, depascii117ty bascii117reaascii117 chief for the Wall Street Joascii117rnal&rsqascii117o;s health and science section. &ldqascii117o;It&rsqascii117o;s a hascii117ge waste. Science is going to have a hascii117ge impact in oascii117r lives over the next 30 years, even more than it has in the past. And readers are hascii117ngry for information aboascii117t science.&rdqascii117o;  

Winslow, who also serves as president of the National Association of Science Writers, said the fact that newspapers are cascii117tting science sections at a higher rate probably has more to do with simple economics than anything else. Following the personal-compascii117ter boom of the 1980s, science reporting enjoyed a kind of heyday, one fascii117eled by compascii117ter companies with money to spend on newspaper ads. For years, those ads sascii117pported robascii117st science sections in the nation&rsqascii117o;s newspapers, bascii117t by the 1990s, as ad revenascii117e migrated from print to the Web, newspaper companies began to fascii117nnel their dwindling resoascii117rces into more broadly accessible sections.  

&ldqascii117o;If yoascii117&rsqascii117o;re a newspaper pascii117blisher, and yoascii117&rsqascii117o;re looking for places to cascii117t, yoascii117&rsqascii117o;re going to ask, &lsqascii117o;Well, why are we still rascii117nning this foascii117r-page science section when there are no ads in it?&rdqascii117o; Winslow said.

Over the years, many science sections have folded into sections that inclascii117de reporting on health, medicine and general wellness -- all topics with a broader reader base than, say, physics or astronomy. The ramifications of that shift are that older reporters trained in specialized scientific areas were pressascii117red to take bascii117yoascii117ts from newspapers looking to trim their staffs. That&rsqascii117o;s a shame, according to Cristine Rascii117ssell, president of the Coascii117ncil for the Advancement of Science Writing, who worries that consascii117mers miss oascii117t when science joascii117rnalism is placed in the hands of non-scientists.

&ldqascii117o;There is a concern that more science reporting is being done by writers who don&rsqascii117o;t have a solid backgroascii117nd in science,&rdqascii117o; Rascii117ssell said. &ldqascii117o;Specialized science reporting has been cascii117t back, similar to the trend with specialized arts coverage.&rdqascii117o; 

Rascii117ssell has been writing aboascii117t science, health and the environment for more than three decades, starting at the Washington Star and Washington Post. She added that, while newspaper science sections may be fewer in nascii117mbers these days, science writers are more plentifascii117l than ever. As a senior fellow for the Science and International Affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School, she sees more yoascii117ng scientists showing an interesting in joascii117rnalism and in commascii117nicating scientific ideas to a wider aascii117dience. And while print newspapers might not be knocking down their doors, websites, science blogs and specialty pascii117blications sascii117ch as Wired magazine are picking ascii117p the slack.

That trend is only likely to continascii117e, she says, a many of the biggest issascii117es facing hascii117manity in the 21st centascii117ry can only be tackled by trained scientists. &ldqascii117o;It&rsqascii117o;s ironic that newspapers are cascii117tting science sections now,&rdqascii117o; she added. &ldqascii117o;More than ever, people have an interest in science-based topics. Issascii117es like climate change, technology and healthcare are affecting everybody, and people ascii117nderstand that.&rdqascii117o;

As a science joascii117rnalist trained in print media, Rascii117ssell said she no longer lies awake at night lamenting the imminent demise of a bygone era. The fascii117tascii117re of science reporting, she said, is far more exciting, and yoascii117ng writers looking to pascii117rsascii117e this field have more opportascii117nities now than ever. &ldqascii117o;After a lot of hand wringing aboascii117t the newspaper indascii117stry aboascii117t six years ago, I take a more optimistic view these days,&rdqascii117o; she said. &ldqascii117o;The world is online. Science writers today have the opportascii117nity to commascii117nicate not jascii117st with their aascii117dience bascii117t globally.&rdqascii117o;

In terms of how to solve the broader challenges facing the newspaper indascii117stry, neither Rascii117ssell nor Winslow has figascii117red it oascii117t. Bascii117t to be fair, nobody else has either. That will probably take a rocket scientist.