Evidence-Based Imagination in Journalism: Insights from Ed Yong
Written on
The significance of journalism has been a focal point for discussion, especially since 2020, as the 24-hour news cycle has intensified. While some journalists have effectively reported on the global pandemic, others have inadvertently or deliberately spread misinformation. This has led to a troubling environment, where confusion surrounding the pandemic has been used to promote various ideological agendas.
On February 10, Ed Yong, an acclaimed science journalist and Pulitzer Prize winner, delivered a talk for Seattle Arts & Lectures centered on "the journalism of evidence-based imagination." His extensive experience in science writing, particularly during the pandemic, has provided him with unique insights into contemporary journalism.
Yong's presentation elaborated on the concept of evidence-based imagination journalism, which aims to provide readers with a comprehensive understanding of current events through informed predictions rooted in historical context. While this approach may seem straightforward, it distinguishes itself from traditional journalism in several key ways.
Having not previously encountered the term "evidence-based imagination journalism," I discovered a lack of readily available resources on the subject. I felt compelled to summarize Yong's insights, as they offer valuable perspectives for anyone engaged in journalism or science writing.
What is Evidence-Based Imagination Journalism?
So, what does the journalism of evidence-based imagination entail? Although Yong does not offer a formal definition, he articulates it succinctly:
“We possess all the historical information necessary to make educated and often accurate forecasts regarding how significant events will influence our future. This method of predicting the future based on past knowledge is essential for addressing some of the most pressing challenges we face.”
This approach involves leveraging historical evidence to make informed predictions about future developments. Although this may appear obvious, many journalists do not adopt this model. Typically, reporters focus solely on the events of the present, which can lead to confusion and anxiety, particularly during crises like the COVID-19 pandemic.
“Helping individuals comprehend ongoing events is distinctly different from merely reporting on them. It necessitates a different skill set altogether.”
Yong identified five key characteristics of evidence-based imagination journalism, which we will explore and analyze further.
1. Broad Perspective
Yong refers to COVID-19 as an “omnicrisis,” affecting various sectors, including healthcare, politics, economics, science, education, and culture. Addressing such a multifaceted issue requires more than a series of brief articles.
“Our field often leans towards fragmentation. We tend to dissect larger stories into smaller segments, presenting them one at a time. In science writing, we often focus on individual papers, and while that approach can work, it is challenging during a crisis like the pandemic.”
He emphasized the need for source diversity, cautioning against relying on the same voices for every story. Engaging with a range of experts—those who may not typically be featured—can provide a richer understanding of complex topics.
While it is important to gain deep insights from experts, Yong warned against attempting to be an authority on all pandemic-related issues, as no single individual can encompass the entirety of such a vast subject.
2. Reflecting on the Past
To make sense of the present, one must understand the recent past. The past provides crucial context for current events, rendering them less surprising.
This may seem intuitive, yet the fast-paced media landscape often overlooks historical context.
“Many of our journalistic instincts drive us to focus exclusively on the present. We tend to report on novel developments, which is our primary role.”
In the context of COVID, many voices and stories have been marginalized or forgotten. Understanding the experiences of those who have lost loved ones, overworked healthcare professionals, and long COVID sufferers is essential for grasping the current state of affairs.
4. Embracing Complexity
“While people desire clear answers, we must acknowledge when those answers are elusive. Our instincts often push us toward simplistic dichotomies, yet we must confront the complexity of the issues.”
Journalists excel at reporting straightforward narratives, but these methods can fall short when addressing intricate topics. This tendency can lead to oversimplification and a failure to capture the broader context.
In covering COVID, many issues have been portrayed in binary terms—such as the safety of vaccinated individuals against variants—overlooking the nuances involved.
5. The Power of Framing
Framing plays a critical role in how narratives are constructed. It involves the deliberate selection of what to include or exclude, influencing readers' perceptions.
Framing effects can be subtle and often go unnoticed. Questions such as who was not given a voice or what assumptions underpin the narrative can significantly shape the understanding of a story.
Yong illustrated this with the example of the Biden administration's focus on a biomedical perspective of the pandemic, emphasizing vaccines while neglecting broader issues such as misinformation and healthcare fatigue. The framing of these issues greatly influences public evaluations of performance.
“Journalism is not merely about conveying information. It shapes our societal values and the frameworks through which we think.”
Reflections on Evidence-Based Imagination Journalism
Journalists often find themselves in one of two roles: the reporter, who covers events without broader context, or the pundit, who examines the bigger picture but offers sweeping generalizations. Yong seeks to merge the strengths of both by grounding facts in the experiences of those impacted while situating them within a broader narrative.
Science writers, not just journalists, can benefit from the concept of evidence-based imagination journalism. The theme of uncertainty is particularly relevant; articles that promise groundbreaking solutions without adequately addressing limitations can foster skepticism when those solutions fall short.
Readers can also apply this framework when consuming science news. Understanding framing and source selection can reveal underlying assumptions and biases present in any narrative.
These lessons extend beyond COVID-19. Climate change, political divisions in the U.S., and racial justice issues also illustrate the complexities we face. As global interconnections deepen, we can expect more stories that demand nuanced reporting.
While Yong's approach to science journalism is compelling, it does set a high bar for writers. It raises questions about whether these principles are intended for covering broad narratives or if they should be integrated into daily reporting practices. I am curious about how this style fits within the wider information landscape.
Yong's talk covered numerous additional topics, including fostering trust, achieving source diversity, and the importance of empathy. I highly recommend his presentation to anyone involved in the realm of science journalism.
I hope Yong's insights stimulate further discourse on science writing and journalism, as the pandemic continues to shape our understanding of communication and information dissemination. The lessons learned will likely grow increasingly vital in the years to come.
If you found this article insightful, consider exploring this deconstruction of one of Ed Yong’s most notable pieces from 2020—"How the Pandemic Defeated America."
Original article is published here.