Dana Bergstrom is an Applied Antarctic Ecologist with the Australian Antarctic Division. She’s been working to communicate the urgency and immediacy of her research to the public for decades, using all kinds of approaches from traditional media to social media and even theatre!
Dana has an incredible breadth and depth of experience communicating with many varied audiences, so I was delighted when she agreed to answer a few questions about how she converts complex science to compelling stories. I’m sure her responses will be illuminating for any researchers curious or uncertain about ways to get your research out to the general public.
You've had two articles published in the Conversation over the past 18 months. They were both hard-hitting and well-written, pitched for an educated popular audience. How did you and your team come up with ideas for your articles, and hooks to engage the non-expert reader?
We actually began thinking about communicating our ideas to the non-expert reader while we were writing the scientific article. I often write a draft press release while trying to work out how to structure the science paper - it helps clarify the narrative of the science paper. From there the comms material is somewhat straightforward.
How did you know at which level to pitch your research for this audience? Did you work with an editor?
I always aim for my writing to be understood by a curious 11 year old. Yes, we did work with an editor after the Conversation drafts were written. They really helped with style and pitch.
How did you learn to write in this narrative-driven, journalistic style?
I try to write with a narrative style on my scientific papers too and this then translates to more broader communication pieces. I use a method taught to me by my colleague, Prof Gaby Nevitt from U California. Plan the piece through creating a dot point paragraph plan (a bit like a movie storyboard). Then write the topic sentence and notes on what needs to be captured in each paragraph, check the sequence and then fill in the details. I have just been introduced to the program called Srivner, which is used a lot in creative industries and it allows you to do just this neatly rather than on bits of paper or just a word processing program. Don't get bogged down in the weeds, keep to the big picture. And put the reveal up front and then follow with detail (opposite of scientific paper writing )
The KISS principle is paramount too. As is writing as clearly as possible. I try to avoid using jargon and my absolute pet hate, acronyms, anyway.
To improve, read lots of science stories for style, put in lots of practice and also get close, non-experts to read the work too and give opinions. I am very lucky in that my partner is singer songwriter, Dugald McLaren. Having a songwriter critique your work is oh so useful, because they are always trying to get ideas across succinctly! - Dugald and my German-born colleague, Barbara Wienecke are the best editors for clear writing that I know. I have learnt so much from both of them. For example, one of the first things I do after I have constructed a draft, is search for the word 'that'. So often, it's superfluous!
What is the process for pitching to the Conversation?
Simply pitch to them. If you are lucky one of your colleagues may have a contact. Or you can approach cold with your story idea. Look for a story by Shaun Brooks on Antarctic footprint. This was a result of a cold pitch.
What advice do you have for early career researchers keen to publish articles there?
Try to construct a compelling story, most often based around an upcoming science paper. Contact well in advance with a short synopsis and if commissioned, write with one or two of your more senior authors from the science paper.
Earlier this year you were interviewed by the ABC about your recent research into the collapse of ecosystems across Australia and Antarctica.
How did that interview come about? Did they contact you? Did you reach out to them?
While a scientific paper is being constructed, I start thinking about whether or not it needs or warrants a communication plan. If it does, I map it out. Does it need a press release? What social media? Does it need a graphical abstract or other graphics?
The collapse paper was interesting because I was one of 38 authors. Multiple press releases were sent out from multiple institutions and the ABC picked up on one of them and they requested an interview. But interestingly, they also created their own online material without reference to any authors, but just reading the paper, and parts of the 102 page supporting material book (which by the way is in a narrative style of communication).
If you are within an institution, always work with your comms people. They can help you navigate the world and give you really sage advice.
Do you have any advice for researchers preparing for their first radio interview?
Work out what you want to say. What is your message?. Imagine what the questions would be. Then practice saying the answers out aloud; not just in your head. Once you have said phrases of coherent ideas out aloud, it is easier to pull them up to answer a question from the interviewer than to come up with an answer on the spot. Just look at multiple interviews of an any actor out on the hustings for a new film. They repeat the narrative they have constructed.
Last year you appeared on #Ask an Expert with the Threatened Species Commissioner on Facebook. How did that come about, and what was your experience?
It came out of the blue from the Threatened Species group and was hoot to do.
Your delivery was extremely clear and accessible to a non-scientific audience. How did you figure out what kind of language and examples to use to appeal to a broader audience?
I again used the a curious 11 year old as my target audience model.
How important do you think Facebook is for communicating science to the public?
All social media can be very useful, but you need to have a picture of who your target audience is and why and what you want to communicate to them.
What advice would you give to researchers who are keen to find similar opportunities to share their work?
Get a selfie stick and make your own videos on your phone on any topic and share on the appropriate platform. Study the platform to see what others are doing that is successful and get out there. Science does not exist if it has not been communicated!
Several researchers I know are keen to build their own website. Do you have one? (I couldn’t find it online). -
I have a page, which you can see by clicking here.
If not, is there any particular reason you’ve chosen to put your energy elsewhere?
No, I'm just a government scientist and yes... websites are a time suck, costly to maintain and easy to neglect. If you look at my work page, you can see I have not updated it since 2015! I also think for ECRs it looks a bit conceited. If you are running a lab and have students, it's a different thing, as it allows you to get across a sense of what your team collectively is doing and helps attract new students.
You mentioned on Twitter that science communication is an essential part of what you do as a scientist. Roughly what proportion of your time do you spend on communicating science to the public, as opposed to researching and writing journal articles?
Hard to calculate, I just do it and it comes in waves. Last week I spent half a day researching a series of tweets on size for @AusAntarctic, another 1.5 days filming vox pops for a big lecture I am giving next month and two days writing a 15min seminar. But other weeks it will be just tracking local nature on Twitter or retweeting or commenting on interesting science.
One of the common things I hear from early career researchers is that there is a strong push towards writing lots of peer-reviewed articles and being cited by other researchers to establish their credibility in their field. What are your thoughts on the relative importance of getting published in scientific journals and communicating with the public?
I am biased, I think there are too many science papers out there and they are next to useless if people don't know about them. But I am very fortunate. I have a full time job that is not predicated on me publishing 15 papers a year!
How do you find the balance?
The balance is personal one. If you are early in your career, you need to work out what gets you to your next level of employment and go for it. But having worked out that, start communicating your science, because we need more scientists out there explaining how the planet operates.
You co-wrote Antarctica, a new musical in collaboration with Dugald McLaren, which debuted at the Theatre Royal in Hobart in 2016. How did that come about?
A crazy Judy Garland/ Micky Rooney moment after seeing a musical in London. "Why don't we write our own musical?" Gosh, that was stupid! Musicals don't get written, they get rewritten!!!
What was the most fulfilling aspect of this project?
1) 2000+ people thought they were coming to see a love story, but it was a story about climate change, based on real extreme events that I tracked in my science.
2) Working on this story with arts creatives and performers was such a wonderful time (despite the usual, not enough time and money).
Were there any aspects that were surprising?
People who had never considered climate change, got climate change after watching the production. We linked facts to emotion ( I killed off puppet penguins to make the point).
Did you face any unexpected challenges? If so, how did you overcome them?
Oh my goodness. So many! I needed to learn a new craft/ field / industry/ mode of communication. I also learnt how little people in the arts get paid. Support your local Arts industry with ticket purchases when you can!
I hear you've got a new creative project in the pipeline, Songs from Antarctica. Can you tell us a bit about what's in store?
As stated above, musicals get re-written. Dugald got support from Arts Tasmania to put on a concert of the show last year, to coincide with an Antarctic conference. But along with every other arts project it got COVID cancelled. So we are planning to put out an album of the work through music and podcast streaming services next year. We are now currently running around, trying to work out how to record performers in lockdown.
It is really interesting to reflect on what has changed re the script and the world since 2016. The character Elizabeth (Station leader) is no longer engaged to her partner Janet, but married! My experience of watching the 2020 East coast summer bushfires from Antarctica has crept into the story line. So much of the world now gets climate change but CO2 is still increasing at such an alarming rate. Despite all the words, all the science, humanity still is not moving fast enough!
Is there anything else you'd like to say to researchers who are starting out on their science communication journey?
Get out there as soon as you can. There has never been a more important time to share your science and help people navigate the world in an informed way!
Thank you so much Dana for sharing your experience and expertise!
