What is the difference between the role of the journalist and the role of the scientist in this piece?
This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.
Homework 5-4
English 220: Introduction to Writing about Literature
Nature and the Modern World
In this reading the difference between the role of the journalist and the role of the scientist is simple. The scientists in this reading pour their heart and soul into their work. First they study the organisms such as the pteropods and they perform observations to see how the organisms are performing in a given environment. After observing they are able to conclude the results and sometimes the results reveal information that could be life changing such as Victoria Farby’s. After accidently changing the pteropods habitat she came to realize that the pteropods were revealing a great deal of information about the ocean. For example ” No one on that boat, including Farby, appreciated what the pteropods were telling them, because no one, at that point, could imagine the chemistry of an entire ocean changing” (212). The scientist’s carry out all the experiments and studies. While the journalist gets brought the studies by the scientists and goes and visits the place of study with them. The scientists tell the journalist all of his findings. This way the findings get published.
The roles of scientists and journalists are different in this writing but at the same time, they are also connected. One specific instance that accounts for this difference is when scientist Chris Langdon developed a theory on the role that coral plays on the pH of the biosphere. As a scientist, he came up with a hypothesis and tested out this hypothesis with experiments and eventually came up with a theory. The role of the scientist here is just to develop experiments, often out of passion for a cause and trying to answers regarding their topic such as why and how? However, for journalist, their job is to relay the scientists’ theories and their experiments and use it in order to persuade others or bring attention to a specific subject. It is through a journalist, that scientific theories are able to surface and come to light and these theories are able to be known to other people. This also allows a chance for other scientists to connect their work to others. For example, “The point of the conference, which was titled “Ocean Acidification- modern observations and past experiences” was to use the methods of paleooceaonography to look into the future. The oceanacidification community is still a small one and at the conference I ran into half the people I had spoken to about the subject, including Victoria Fabry, Ken Caldeira, and Chris Langdon” (Kolbert, 232). This shows that without the help of journalist but also the works of scientist, not many people would have known about ocean acidity.
The roles of a journalist and that of a scientist are completely different, but both are necessary for the other to succeed. The role of a scientist is to uncover new information or to validify old information. In this piece, it was the scientists who discovered the relationship between carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the development of organisms in the sea that rely on calcium carbonate. This was initially discovered by pure accident when Victoria Fabry too many pteropods in a single container and noticed that their shells began to dissolve. Although “no one on the boat, including Fabry, appreciated what the pteropods were telling them,” this eventually led to a larger discovery. However, without the aid of journalists, this discovery would have gone unnoticed or ignored. By spreading information of new discoveries, journalists also facilitate the further testing of the discovery as more scientists become aware of it. Journalists rely on scientists to discover, while scientists rely on journalists to make their discoveries known.
The role of the journalist and the role of the scientist in this piece is quite drastically different but beneficial in their own respective ways. In this reading, we are introduced to a couple of great scientists who made surpassing contributions and discoveries to the scientific field through an endless amount of hard work. For example, Victoria Fabry, an oceanographer who would frequently go on research ships and collect specimens to study them. But on one of her trips, she discovered how the Clio pyramidata pteropod species were vulnerable to carbon dioxide build-ups in the oceans and how the change in the ocean`s chemistry was greatly damaging their biology. Fabry did not make these discoveries that easily, it took her years of studying it and physically researching them in their environments. It states in the reading, “She resigned herself to constantly collecting new specimens. This turn meant going out on just about any research ship that would have her… She would catch some pteropods, either by trawling with a net or by scuba-diving” (Kolbert, p.211). This shows how much physical labor and passion that Fabry poured into her work and how difficult it is to make a discovery or even contribute to the scientific field. Additionally, Ken Calderia, a climate modeler who focuses on the computations on the effects of human activities on the environments was mentioned in the reading. All the scientists mentioned in the reading first set out a hypothesis, in order to prove their hypotheses, they would conduct years of worth experiments and even face criticisms and skepticism from a lot of people when publishing their findings. Moreover, the roles of the scientists require lots of hard work, passion, and patience. The journalist`s job in this piece was to deliver efficiently the works of the scientists to the public. Although the roles of the journalist do not require them to work years long to prove their theories without knowing if they ever will be able to prove it, the job of the journalist is quite important also. From my own experience, reading research papers published by scientists is quite hard because they often use high-level scientific terms that are quite difficult to understand. However, this reading was quite easier to understand, and having a journalist covering pieces on a scientific topic is very beneficial. Journalists have the ability to deliver to the general public the necessary scientific knowledge that is needed in forms that are easier for them to comprehend.
In Field Notes from a Catastrophe, scientists conduct research to acquire more a greater understanding of the world while the journalist is responsible for sharing such information with the greater public. In some cases though, the journalist also seeks to sift through such findings, searching for only pieces of the truth that they deem adequate. Scientists like Ken Calderia have made massive findings, such as the devastating effects of dumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. However, when they attempt to share these findings with the world with the hope of making a difference, they are oftentimes discouraged by editors “because the calculations [concerning the effects of ordinary atmospheric release] were so startling” (216). In this sense, journalists have control over the information that the public has access to as they can choose what gets published and what does not. Thus, to reject such an important on the basis that its findings are too “startling” for the public to know about prevents people from realizing that our current ways are extremely damaging to the environment.
In this passage, there are key differences between the scientist and the journalist. It can be seen that while the scientist goes out to make the discovery through conducting researching to understand how and why certain things occur, the journalist goes out to share the information with others on a great scale. The journalist gives meaning to the finding. Both cannot succeed without the other because without a scientist, what will journalists have to share and without a journalist, who will make sure that the scientists’ work was not for nothing and give them the recognition they deserve. An example in the passage is when Victoria Fabry made a great finding. She saw that build ups in carbon dioxide alter the chemistry of water which prior to her discovery would not seem like a problem for the pteropods. She later realized that the pteropods were “highly sensitive to such changes” and these changes are dangerous for these organisms. A discovery like this may not seem important to the general public and in this case, it went unnoticed without a journalist to spread this information with the world. This finding deserved to go out to the public. Once you add things people might care more about, they will regret that such information was not spread. Thus, the journalist needs the scientist and the scientist needs the journalist.
The role of Journalists and Scientists differ profession wise but work symbiotically to spread important information. One scientist mentioned in Field Notes from a Catastrophe would be Victoria Fabry who is a world-renowned expert on pteropods. Upon putting too many pteropods in a bottle, she made a great discovery on the effects of carbon dioxide on oceanic species. Analysis of the pteropod’s shells that “were dissolving” proves that there are drastic effects on having coal-burning industries. She made the discovery, but with the help of journalists the public will be more aware of the effects of their carbon footprint. The journalists do not make the discoveries, but spread the information to inform people.
Continuation:
Both scientists and journalists can be passionate about their work and put a lot of time into their careers. Fabry herself spends years studying the ocean and searching for ptetopods. A journalist’s job does not appear to be as important as a scientist’s but someone like Fabry would not be known for her work if not for the help of writers. Scientists need the help of journalists to make the most of their years of hard work.
The roles of scientist and journalist are very different but they are both play important roles in getting new information out to the world. Scientist find information using the scientific method and research. In “Field notes from a catastrophe'” is discuses that scientists have learnt the effects of CO2 on the ocean. The scientist figures out that humans are creating billions of tons of CO2 per year, most of which is absorbed by the ocean. The journalist use the new information and research from the scientist and transcribe it into a well written article or paper. These papers allow others to learn out the research of the scientists and sometimes allows for two separate experiments to come together.
Scientists and journalists share core aspirations. Both disciplines are about observing the world, questioning the unknown and collecting facts. Both scientists and journalists know their work is built on the work of others and they must find a way to share their discoveries. Scientists, however have been acculturated to be as dispassionate and detached as they can and to communicate in a highly stylized way that includes a broad sweep with lots of qualification and expressions of uncertainty, the biggest words they can muster, acronyms, cryptic abbreviations, mathematical notations, and more details that regular people won’t necessarily understand. Journalists are trained to tell their stories in the broadest, simplest language so that it reaches the widest possible audience while making it interesting at the same time.
We find that, in the passage, the roles of the journalist and scientist are very different but they need the support of one another as a way to keep the public informed. They both seek information in different ways. A scientist actively conducts experiments, in order to discover new things. For example in the passage, ” to test his hypothesis Langdon employed a straightforward but time-consuming procedure.” This shows the passion that scientist have for their work. However when these scientist come to a conclusion, in order to keep the public informed to give way to new discoveries, a journalist has to document the actions of the scientist and publish it. This shows that both roles are of utmost importance for the sake of the advancement of knowledge.
Within the passage the author does an excellent job defining the roles of the journalist and the scientists, both of which focus on the interpretation of information and discoveries. For scientists, their role revolves around conduct a study in attempt to make a discovery or validate a hypothesis. Whereas for journalists, their role is centered around the spread of said new information, or putting it in understandable terms so that it may be published. For example, within the story the problem of climate change is critical, shown by the labor Farby puts herself through to gather research. Farby conducts many trials and finally finds that carbon dioxide emissions within the water have a negative effect on the ocean’s inhabitants, more specifically the pteropods. It is possible that the average person cannot interpret the meaning of this breakthrough as well as someone educated in the field, in come the journalist. The journalist then takes this new breakthrough and translates it in simpler terms so that the public can receive this information, and understand the significance of the study. Both the journalist and scientists depend and flourish off one another, having the job of educating the general public of new discoveries.
The journalist and scientist have roles that contrast one another but are dependent, as scientists have embarked on a journey to discover new information or to confirm prior findings. A journalist scours though this information to find a story that has a larger impact and reports the most accurate scientific reports. Seen through Victoria Fabry’s work, her dedication to studying pteropods has led to numerous experiments that has demonstrated the sensitivity to certain factors such as CO2. Her enacting this research, gives journalist the ability to cover this story and further understand these impacts. Journalist take these scientific hypothesis and conclusions in order to present the public with new information by publishing them. Langdon also poured his efforts into research where “the experiment took more than three years to complete, produced more than a thousand measurements, and in the end, confirmed Langdon’s hypothesis” (224). This shows the dedication coming from the scientists in order to confirm their results/hypothesis. This news can spread through journalists pushing this content to favor the truth. The journalist and the scientist are reliant on one another, to provide their sources with updated information on their study, while being able to display their work.
The roles of the journalist and the scientist are related but distinct in “Field Notes From a Catastrophe”. While the scientist is responsible for discovery, the journalist is responsible for the spread of that discovery and its consequences. The scientists are the ones who put in years of hard work to make the discoveries that they do, but their work would remain unknown and / or unrecognized unless publicized properly. Journalists may not be putting in years of work into their articles, but they are making the effort to read scientific journals and sift through large amounts of articles to curate the sources they base their work off of. Their translations of these sources to more readable formats allow for the spread of important information that would otherwise remain largely unknown.
In Catastrophe, the authors portray scientists as someone who is pursuing their interest and carrying out experiments and meanwhile a journalist as someone who can act as the bridge between the scientist and the people. The role of a scientist is to figure out the unknown. They put in the effort to learn the subject better and further correlates to the outside frame of how it contributes as a whole. Victoria Fabry is an Oceanographer. She is known as one of the “world’s most leading experts on pteropods. Her curiosity about the pteropods leads her to “study” about their growth. This included Fabry to carry out multiple experiments to test their “hypothesis”. Furthermore, it is notified in the essay, the scientist often takes the role of identifying the solution to “what if” situations. A journalist picks up the studies done by the scientist and delivers it to the people. A journalist is reliant on the sources given by the scientist since it holds the key to educating the public and make the public aware of issues.
While the scientists’ jobs were to make discoveries and provide research data for the public, the journalists’ job is to gather the important information that would interest the readers to bring in more attention to the topic. We see in the reading how the scientists were focusing on gathering the facts and reporting them to the journalist who was in charge of taking in and out information that would be published. For example, we see in the reading that Caldeira had some calculations in his research on the ocean’s PH, but after letting the journalist look over it, they “advised him to drop the discussion…. Because the calculations … were so startling” (216.) From this interaction, we see how Caldeira provides all the facts and evidence, while the journalist is the one to decide which facts are necessary to share with others. Although both of them focus on different aspects in the research, they work together in order to create an article suitable for people to read, making it easier to understand for those who are unfamiliar with the topic.
While the journalist and scientist have two distinct goals both are codependent upon each other. The scientists test theories and conduct experiments to get down to the truth of nature. These discoveries are continuous, as the same process will be done by scientists after them. On the other hand, the journalist then makes the information more accessible to society. In a sense both are working towards providing knowledge for someone else’s utilization.
The role of the scientist in this text is to provide the journalist and the reader with scientifically proven information that displays facts about a certain issue. In this case for instance, Ken Caldeira was a scientist who created a model to show how the presence of CO2 in the atmosphere affects the ocean life. He explains that CO2 is produced from the burning of fossil fuels, which is eventually absorbed by the ocean. This causes ocean acidification, or the decrease in pH in the ocean, which ultimately reduces the amount of carbonate ions in the ocean. The issue is that calcium carbonate is essential for organisms to create their shells. Therefore, the purpose of the scientist is to provide the facts and evidence about controversial issues such as climate change. However, the role of the journalist is quite different because the journalist takes this information and creates a story out of it. The journalist utilizes morals and feelings in order to make the reader feel something, and create a connection to these scientific facts. The journalist plays a significant role because she is able to translate these facts into simpler terms, and create this overall message that climate change and industrial processes are harmful to the environment.
The role of the scientist and journalist are quite different but not entirely. They have complete different professions involving different work ethics where scientists use the scientific method and conduct experiments and whatnot while journalists gather relevant information about topics that would entice the public. In “Field notes from a catastrophe’” it says that scientists have looked into how CO2 has an effect on the ocean. They determine that people are creating too much CO2 per year, and most of that quantity is being absorbed by the ocean. Scientists then publish their work in a highly professional and complex way practically just for the scientific world to know about. The journalists as well gather information but from other sources and have the ability to create a clear and concise article using terms that would be well received by the public; hence how the scientists work/discoveries are able to reach even more ordinary people. This here actually highlights how scientists and journalists work hand and hand to cause awareness about information that would be serving to the public as a whole.
In this piece, both the scientist and the journalist have an essential role in the study and discovery of new and vital information. While scientists are responsible for researching and putting data and information together on their study, the journalist are responsible for conveying that information to the greater public. In this piece, the greater topic of carbon dioxide and its abundant effect on the world gets broken down and studied further every time by a different researcher and scientist. One such scientist was Chris Langdon who studied the acidity/pH of an environment. As a scientist, Chris Langdon had a hypothesis that he wanted to test which involved studying the correlation between corals and the saturation of the environment, and thus on pH. After “three years to complete, produced more than a thousand measurements, and in the end, confirmed Langdon’s hypothesis” – being that increases saturation of the amount of concentration in the ocean/increase in pH, increased the growth of the corals. While this hypothesis was tested and repeated over a long period of time, “biologists remained skeptical”. It wasn’t until that he had published his findings in a journal and another several years, other researchers launched their own investigations on different species. As a result, they were able to confirm Langdon’s hypothesis. This demonstrates the role of journalism to support the studied conducted on science as well. Scientists depend on journals to get others interested on their discovery in hopes to allow others to collaborate and develop further on the topic. As Langdon put it, “is the best way to make believers out of people.”
In this piece, the role of the journalist and scientist are different, but also interconnected—similar to the poet and scientist in Wordsworth’s works. The scientist conducts studies in their laboratories for years trying to solve problems like riddles and not much attention is given to their studies. The journalist’s job, however, is to bring awareness to the public about these matters. As explained in this text, often times ideas are misportrayed, and some facts about climate change are not as accurate. Thus, the public receiving this information is not aware of the intensity of the situation. The author mentions how the current President denied current change and how she also did for a while as well. The role of the journalist is to clear these misunderstandings and bring awareness to scientific research. Journalists take the work of the scientists and translate it for the general public. As mentioned in the text, often times a scientist just spends years in their lab. Without journalists, the public would not be aware of the disastrous effects of climate change. Already, the numbers are said to be less than they actually are, and if action is not taken, things will only become worse. Therefore, it is the job of the journalist to bring awareness to the misconceptions of the public.
I read the wrong text, but this is a response to the text we were to read:
Scientists and journalists work together to gather information about issues and relay them to the public. The role of the scientist is to study specific information about ideas like climate change. For example, scientists like Caldeira may study the effects of carbon dioxide on oceans he like does. After gathering information scientists are sometimes able to draw conclusions from them. The job of the journalist is to transcribe these findings into terms understandable for normal people and explain the stakes of a certain finding. The journalist answers the “why does this matter” question on the implications that should result from these studies. The scientist needs to work together with the journalist to provide this information to the public.