578 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XL. No. 1034 



pujblicity to the problem? If the masses 

 are not reached in the schools they may be 

 reached through the newspaper, but at 

 present the relation of science to the press 

 is in a lamentable state. Especially in 

 this country, where we pride ourselves on 

 the freedom, the enterprise and the versa- 

 tility of the daily newspaper, the relation 

 is particularly unsatisfying to scientific 

 men, and altogether ineffective as a means 

 of properly interesting and informing the 

 public on scientific progress. Probably the 

 fault lies on both sides. The press, in 

 catering to the popular taste for the sensa- 

 tional and in disregarding the very foun- 

 dation of scientific inquiry, which is ac- 

 curacy, utterly fails to reflect the purpose 

 and the results of scientific activity. On 

 the other hand, men of science hold them- 

 selves aloof, and do not appreciate their 

 opportunity to exert a useful influence. It 

 may be that the latter is the real root of the 

 evil. In any case, it is at this end of the 

 line that we ourselves may best try to help 

 out. It is true that the limited experience 

 which members of our profession have had 

 in the matter of newspaper publicity does 

 not lend much encouragement to the hope 

 of a satisfactory outcome. Some of the 

 most influential dailies avowedly have the 

 desire to promote the true interests of sci- 

 ence in relation to the public welfare ; they 

 have the confidence of some scientific men, 

 and often have direct access to the sources 

 of discovery, but what one of us can be 

 satisfied with the form in which new dis- 

 coveries are reported? "We can not, of 

 course, expect statements of our work to 

 command the attention of the public if 

 couched in the language of the Jahreshe- 

 richt. Explanatory matter must be given, 

 but beyond the demand of a diseased taste 

 for the sensational, is there any necessity 

 for the form in which science is now pre- 

 sented in the newspapers? Must a discov- 



ery, in order to attract notice, necessarily 

 be heralded in flaring headlines as the 

 greatest of the day and be accompanied by 

 a full-page portrait of the discoverer? 

 Yet that is the kind of science given to the 

 newspaper-reading public to quench its 

 thirst for knowledge. 



Each year there are held in this country, 

 not to speak of the world at large, numer- 

 ous scientific congresses, at which much is 

 communicated that is of the utmost im- 

 portance to civilization. "We should expect 

 to find the proceedings adequately and 

 decently reported in the newspapers. That 

 this expectation is vain, is, however, ob- 

 vious. To relate a little experience of my 

 own will serve to answer why it is so. A 

 few minutes before being called upon to 

 speak at a medical congress not long ago, 

 I was approached by a reporter who asked 

 for an account of my paper. My remon- 

 strance that he could soon hear what was 

 to be said to the assembly, evoked the 

 reply that he hadn 't time for that and, be- 

 sides, he wouldn't be able to understand 

 if he had. Immediately after the meeting 

 another reporter came up and asked me to 

 explain the papers that had been read, 

 and particularly what was meant by the 

 terms "tissue," "cell" and "heart-beat," 

 confessing frankly that he hadn't under- 

 stood a word of what had been said. 



Clearly there is no reason to find fault 

 with either of these men for their igno- 

 rance. They may have been quite com- 

 petent in their regular work. They cer- 

 tainly had the virtues of frankness and of 

 knowing their own limitations. It would 

 be unreasonable to blame a reporter of 

 sporting or police news for a lack of 

 knowledge of radio-activity or experi- 

 mental embryology, but what should we 

 say of otherwise resourceful newspapers 

 that send such men to report scientific 

 news for a knowledge-craving and credu- 



