NASW holds the independent competition annually to honor outstanding investigative and interpretive reporting about the sciences and their impact on society for good or ill. The 67-year-old organization aims to recognize and encourage critical, probing works in six categories-newspaper, magazine, television, radio, Web, and book-without subsidy from any professional or commercial interest. The award is unique in that entries must not only be well-written or produced accounts of significant scientific issues, they must also explore the ramifications of research results to society. Winners each receive $1,000 and a certificate, which will be awarded in February at the 2003 annual meeting of NASW in Denver.
In the newspaper category, Rick Weiss of the Washington Post took top honors for "Building a New Child: Embryo Screening Creates a Tool Against Disease-and Ethical Questions" (June 30, 2001), in which he brought a combination of excellent enterprise reporting, fine writing, and great ideas to his story and his coverage of this issue. At a time when so many reporters are writing either explanatory "gee-whiz" or political stories about hi-tech, baby-making procedures, Weiss stood out in his ongoing critical examination of the important and unresolvable ethical dilemmas created by these techniques.
In a category brimming with outstanding entries this year, two people shared the magazine award: Shannon Brownlee, Senior Markle Fellow of the New America Foundation, for "The Big Fat Question," published in Self magazine (December 2001), and Charles W. Schmidt, Environmental Health Perspectives, for "e-Junk Explosion" (March 2002). In citing Brownlee's work, the judges applauded an article about fat that truly stood out in a magazine that has probably had more than its fill of stories about fat. The panel felt Brownlee's intelligent and elegant prose brought out important scientific ideas that may not normally reach the magazine's readership. Co-winner Schmidt's story showcased great reporting on a subject that the panel felt has been vastly undercovered. This entry highlighted a social problem, created by new technology - and one that has technological and social solutions.
If there had been a science-in-society prize in Darwin's days, evolution would have been a real contender, and it obviously still is. In the television category, Richard Hutton, executive producer, WGBH/NOVA Science Unit, is honored for "Evolution" (broadcast Sept. 24-27, 2001). Credit goes to the producers of this landmark series for recognizing the impact the science of evolution has had on society for well over 100 years. This captivating series took viewers from jungles to islands to classrooms to highlight the continuing scientific discoveries and political struggles over one of the most basic topics in all of science.
William S. Hammack, associate professor for chemical engineering, University of Illinois, and Illinois Public Radio, won in the radio category for "Engineering and Life," Will-AM580, Urbana, Ill. (June 5, 2001-May 31, 2002). The judges simply fell in love with William Hammack. His clever commentaries about extraordinary and ordinary things and how they came to be opens a window on engineering, science, discovery, and their role in our world. Prof. Hammack is a true storyteller, drawing in the listener with his fine writing.
Web judging is challenging: there's the writing, the graphics, the video, the audio, the links, the photos - the whole package can take hours to view and appreciate. The judges felt that Alan Boyle, of MSNBC, exploited all the Web can offer - in the best possible way - with "Genetic Genealogy" (Jan. 16-Feb. 26, 2002). His judicious use of personal journalism helped bring the often-complex subject of genes alive. He varied the writing and the styles of the articles (or whatever you call things displayed on the Web!) and keeps drawing the Web visitor deeper and deeper into the material, creating even more curiosity.
Jon Cohen, contributing editor, Science, took top honors in the book category for Shots in the Dark: The Wayward Search for an AIDS Vaccine (W.W. Norton & Company, 2001). Engaging, well researched, and well written, the book skillfully shows the tug-of-war between science and society in the search for an AIDS vaccine. It's an important book, not simply because AIDS is such an important research topic, but because society needs to learn from the mistakes and successes of what has, so far, been an unsuccessful search for a vaccine. Cohen shows that this saga has impact on whether science is going to remain relevant in the future when big problems arise.
The 2002 awards committee was co-chaired by Peggy Girshman, National Public Radio, and Carol Ezzell, Scientific American magazine. The final judging committee consisted of Girshman; Dan Haney, Associated Press; John Rennie, Scientific American; Jane Stevens, a freelance multimedia journalist; and Laura Tangley, National Wildlife magazine.
Finalists were selected by committees representing each category. Newspaper: Pete Spotts, Christian Science Monitor (chair); Eric Sorenson, The Seattle Times; Lori Valigra, freelance; and Robert Lee Hotz, Los Angeles Times. Magazine: Ezzell (chair); Marguerite Holloway, Scientific American and science writing instructor at Columbia School of Journalism; and Nancy Shute, US News & World Report. Broadcast: Don Torrance, Syracuse University (chair); and Jane Weiner, documentary filmmaker. Web: Jim Keeley, Howard Hughes Medical Institute (chair); Annemarie Amparo, ScienCentral; and Dave Tenenbaum, The Why Files. Book: Steve Tally, Purdue University (chair), Ivan Amato, author; Sara Latta, author; and Sally Maran, Smithsonian magazine.
The awards are administered by Diane McGurgan, executive director of NASW. The deadline for submitting entries for the 2003 Science-in-Society awards is July 1, 2003 for work published or broadcast in North America between June 1, 2002 and May 31, 2003. Books must have a 2002 copyright date and be published during that calendar year. For more information, visit nasw.org/society.htm.