During the years of the 1970s to 1990s, the news evolution was covered. It was a time of great interest in science, and science writers wrote articles based on their research and findings. Today, this interest in change has continued.
Science writers covered evolution in the 1970s
News Evolution – During the mid-century science boom, science writers covered the latest discoveries. The invention of DNA and the “race to the Moon” provided ample fodder for a plethora of science writers.
However, as the Internet sped up the speed of information and communications, the old-school mass media stumbled and fell. Today, Americans are as likely to turn to the web for their science news as they turn to television.
This is because, unlike television, the web provides accurate time updates, ad revenue, and access to an unprecedented amount of scientific information.
The Internet has ushered in a new era in science writing for many. Today, writers can chronicle the wonders of modern science and the woes of contemporary science. These writers provide instant access to the latest scientific literature and information on the latest scientific breakthroughs.
However, the Internet has also pushed the old-school mass media to the back of the bus. For example, there were fewer science writers covering evolution in the 1970s than today due to the rise of the Internet.
The old school of science journalism was slow and stodgy. Unlike the Internet, the press was primarily technical writing for trade journals. The golden age of science writing was short-lived. In the mid-twenties, Science magazine hired science PhDs to write research news for non-scientists. However, the science of science writing was still relatively new.
The naive reader could assume that, since science PhDs are generally more intelligent than other humans, they would be able to write a science news story on their own. However, the Internet sped up the speed of information and communication, and the old school of science journalism was left behind.
The best science writers have found ways to make a living writing about science. They have taken advantage of the media coverage to relay claims of impressive discoveries and have found ways to create the omen oleums of the science world.
They have also found ways to ignore in-house problems that detract from the credibility of scientific research. In fact, many of them are toadies for godlike biologists.
The Internet and its attendant technologies sped up the science writing process, allowing the intrepid science writer to cover various topics.
For example, the “race to the Moon” inspired a new breed of space reporters at NASA and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. These writers had to be the smartest to cover the latest discoveries, and they also had to be the most creative to keep their readers interested.
The Internet also sped up the process of scientific writing, and the latest generation of science writers cover a wide array of topics, from evolution to cosmology to astronomy to neuroscience. The Internet has also pushed the old school of science journalism to the back of the bus.
Science writers covered evolution in the 1980s
During the 1980s, American newspapers hired many science writers for science sections. But when newspapers began to cut costs, the science section often became the first one to go. However, some venues for science writing still survive. And a new form of science journalism is being invented.
During the 1980s, science magazines included Omni, Discover, and Science Digest. These magazines were primarily specialized journals but hired reporters to write science news for non-scientists. Science editors hired these reporters to write about scientific research for readers who had no prior interest in science.
The newspapers were also hiring science reporters for their weekly science sections. These reporters covered various topics, including evolutionary biology, global food security, and biodiversity.
In the 1980s, newspapers, and magazines held a near monopoly on science writing. New ideas took a lot of work to get into print. At the same time, the mass media relied on uncritical reports of technological wizardry and miracles.
As a result, old-school journalism was stodgy and hierarchical. There was no way for the average reader to know whether the science they were reading was scientifically accurate.
The only alternative was crudely printed zines that attracted a fraction of the large magazine circulation. In the 1980s, there was no such thing as an “online magazine.” There were no Internet sites that could compete with the big magazines.
In the 1980s, many newspapers had weekly science sections. They hired scientists as “science correspondents” and science reporters, putting these scientists on television and in popular broadcasting. They added health correspondents, as well. This created an ecology in which “old school” mass media was pushed to the periphery of public awareness.
Then in the late 1990s, the Internet took hold. A new medium made it possible to report on science in multiple media. It also fueled the growth of digital science writers, who were chronicling the wonders of modern science.
These writers were also working on books. Some have won the National Book Critics Circle Award and the Pulitzer Prize. Some have written books on evolution, while others have written about mammals, birds, and viruses. Some have also worked as freelance science journalists.
Others have worked as public information officers or as staffers for publications. They live in the United States and Canada and have worked as radio and television reporters, corporate writers, and even as public information officers for universities and non-profit organizations.
In the late 1990s, the Internet splintered the ecology of traditional science journalism. There were fewer science writers in newspapers and less advertising and revenue for science magazines.
Many of the magazines went out of business. This forced the old media to find new business models. In fact, some of these recent publications are thriving.
Science writers covered evolution in the 1990s
During the 1990s, science writers covered a gamut of science-related topics. They covered the “race to the moon” and scientific and technological breakthroughs such as successful heart transplants.
They also covered medical and biomedical research and new diseases like HIV/AIDS. Some science reporters covered the whole gamut, while others specialized in sub-beats of science writing, such as the health and medicine sector.
One of the first significant changes in science writing was the rise of the digital. The Internet provided a platform for digital science writers to chronicle the wonders of modern science. It also provided a platform for the public to participate in a dialogue on science. Moreover, it made science journalism a real job.
Furthermore, ad revenue dried up as the Internet ushered in the Internet age, making print media less profitable for publishers. Moreover, the Internet has also pushed “old school” mass media into the dustbin of history.
There were a lot of new ideas and technologies that were too big to fit into the pages of a paper publication. The Internet allowed scientists to reach a much wider audience. Moreover, the Internet made it easier for non-specialists to obtain scientific information. In turn, the mass media relied on uncritical reports of technological wizardry and medical miracles.
The Internet also incentivized the media to report on the “biggest science-related story of the decade,” the cloning of animals. This was a significant feat of science that was largely unreported in the old media. In addition, the cloning of animals drew attention to the global scientific enterprise.
One of the best things about the Internet was that it allowed the discovery of many new and fascinating science-related sites. These sites included the “Google” of science reporting and a new breed of science blogs. These sites combine scientific knowledge with engaging writing.
The NASW, which is the largest membership organization for professional science writers, has a membership of 2,250 members. This includes both full-time and freelance science writers. Most of them work for various publications, but only a few are employed by the media. Only 4 percent are staff reporters. Most are freelance writers.
In fact, only 2 percent of NASW members are staff editors. Most members are freelance writers, and one percent are employed by radio and television. The most significant number of members are involved in the public affairs sector. This includes writing and reporting on health, technology, and public policy issues. However, a large percentage of NASW members are freelance writers who work on science-related projects.
The Internet has also spawned the largest new industry, the “science-related boop.” Many scientists now take their work directly to the public. They can also use social media tools to enhance their ability to reach new audiences.