One of the biggest barriers to progress is the fact that most of the people who have succeeded in a given field and have the power to change things think the system works ~just~ ~fine~ the way it is. 1/x
You help run a medical school and you had to spend years of your training sleep deprived? Well, so should new trainees. 2/x
Your have won an award and now your organization wants to change the contributions it recognizes with its awards? Nonsense. The awards recognize the exact right types of accomplishments! 3/x
This problem is acute in news journalism. People in upper management are the ones who embrace the both-sides-ism and appearance-of-a-conflict-of-interest-ism and cult of objectivity that harms their staff and their readers. 4/x
But the system worked for them! They don't recognize their luck, their privilege, or the way their biases (which they think they don't have) make "objective" mean that their journalism is unthreatening to people who have likewise succeeded in their chosen fields. 5/x
And it's not just the abstract system that worked for them — they also succeeded because they ingratiated themselves to the previous generation of people who succeeded by ingratiating themselves to the previous generation of people who succeeded in the system. 6/x
If you are in a position to change things, recognize that you have been reinforcing exclusion, and either fix it or get out of the way. And for goodness sake don't just hire another person who thinks things are great the way they are. 7/7
Anyway I'm just glad @feliciasonmez can do her job again but her treatment has been reprehensible & so many people supported the system that harmed her — after all it works great for them.
Also, if you're in a leadership position? Run your organization in a way that you won't have to worry about what people will say after they leave it
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Banning Robert F. Kennedy Jr. from Instagram should slow the spread of his dangerous lies and disinformation. Some publications politely call him an "anti-vaccine activist" but he's a conspiracy fantasist who knowingly incites threats against scientists 1/ nytimes.com/2021/02/11/us/…
He's been relentless during the COVID pandemic at spreading lies about every stage of the vaccine process. He's never been more dangerous. washingtonpost.com/education/2021…
Join this webinar (happening now) from @NASEM_DBASSE on reporting on COVID. From @vishplus: "Journalism has been a saving grace" during the pandemic. His surveys show people who read traditional media are well informed about vaccines & eager to get them nationalacademies.org/event/02-05-20…
The @BostonGlobe has been gathering data on racial disparities of the pandemic and identifying problems and inequities in vaccine distribution -- drawing attention more than anyone else, @vishplus says
From James Druckman & his team's survey: Lots of people who are hesitant don't know that vaccines were extensively tested. Reporters should emphasize the size and clear findings from clinical trials to increase vaccine uptake
"Anchoring bias" is a huge problem with the coronavirus pandemic -- people tend to remember the first things they learn about a new subject & have a hard time updating that with new info (thread) scientificamerican.com/article/nine-i… via @sciam
The virus doesn't kill only people in China or in Italy or on cruise ships or in nursing homes. It can kill absolutely anybody. It's not just those other people's problem. It's everybody's problem.
It's not just in sneezes or coughs. Contaminated surfaces aren't the main problem. This coronavirus is In! The! Air!, spread by people who aren't necessarily sick and who are just singing or talking or breathing.
I’ve been a judge for a lot of writing awards. The deliberations are always strictly confidential, and I can’t say anything about specific contests, but I can tell you a bit about how the process works from a judge’s perspective, and what you can do to be more competitive.
But first, if you’ve ever won a contest: Congratulations! Your work was brilliant, the judges were brilliant, and awards are a fair and accurate recognition of the best writing in your field.
Second, if you’ve ever been a finalist or gotten an honorable mention: Congratulations! Your work was also brilliant! It can sting to find out you were so close to winning an award but didn’t get it (been there, felt that), but it’s still a big honor.
I'm an editor, so a lot of what I do is cut or change words. These are some of the mistakes and misuses I see all the time & how to fix them. This thread is not to shame or subtweet anybody -- I learned many of these mistakes by making them myself. Please add your own favorites!
"Enormity" means something really bad, not something really big.
"Japanese/Brazilian/Finnish/Australian researchers discovered..." Science is the most international endeavor in human history. Any team that makes a discovery worth covering almost certainly includes people who aren't citizens, so instead say: "Researchers in Japan/Brazil/etc."
We had an important discussion at #wcsj2019 about how to protect your sources, your data, and yourself. Here’s a thread of highlights from the session with lots of digital security advice & links. wcsj2019.eu/Sessions/Data-…
Here are some of the ways people can share information confidentially with The @WashingtonPost Note that number five is: Drop it in the mail, from a mailbox. This was a theme throughout the session: Don't use technology if you can avoid it. washingtonpost.com/anonymous-news…