+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: The Press and Archaeology (/showthread.php?tid=3589)
The Press and Archaeology - BAJR - 18th November 2010
REcently we have seen a flurry of news articles ... some informed some so ill informed that you worry at the quality of reporting. We are lucky to have a few reporters in the UK that actually know what they are talking about. But this is not always the case... When I recently complained to a newspaper about being called an architect - I was told to get over it, everyone makes mistakes. This is true, but when it comes to reporting archaeology, do we have a responsibility in ensuring he complex data they get is not turned into an idiot article?
Take this
Genetic research reveals an American woman in Iceland in the 10th century - many articles have perpetuated the myth of the Viking (who they? a sloppy shorthand) and the idea that a Native American (from where, its a big place?) was kidnapped (evidence please) and forced to Iceland.
We took a different approach, by offering more of the original evidence and research. There could be... many reasons for this occurrence.... now read on
Surely there is a half way house between spoonfeeding and unreadable (if you do not have a background in that subject) academic paper?
http://www.pasthorizons.com/index.php/archives/11/2010/genetic-research-american-in-iceland
The Press and Archaeology - Odinn - 18th November 2010
Thanks for a well-presented discussion. It would be nice to think that this evidence represents the children that ?orfinnr karlsefni is supposed to have brought back from the new world according to Eir?ks saga rau?a, although upon reading the article there is some uncertainty expressed about the actual origins of the sequence. I would query the idea that Iceland was 'practically isolated' from the tenth century onwards though. This seems to be overstating the case, given that there was known contact with Scandinavia at the very least through the medieval period. I am also curious to know why they did not discuss the Greenlandic settlements and their probable contact with the east coast of America, as well as their contact with Iceland and Scandinavia up to their isolation and death in the late medieval period. That might well have enhanced the discussion with regard to a North American origin for the DNA sequence. One point, me being picky and all that, but should your article not read Vatnaj?kull rather than Vatnaj Kull?
The Press and Archaeology - BAJR - 18th November 2010
Vatnaj?kull it is then
The Press and Archaeology - Jack - 18th November 2010
The press (as a whole) are idiots.
If you track any story back to its original source, you'll probably find out its got nothing to do with what the press say it is.
A great example is the research on the salinity of the overturning halide current thingy (gulf stream is part of it).
The researchers talk to the press, the press say that fresh water dumped at the top of the gulf stream is diluting the salinity which could cause it to stop or move.
Some one makes a film about this causing a new ice age.
Now I accidently found an article in a nerc magazine that wasn't hyped up by the press. The researchers said that they'd done some measurements, found salinity to be low, were concerned BUT they didn't know the natural variability of the system so need to take further readings
During the period of the further readings, the press claimed a new ice age was coming and the film was made.
After the film was released the researchers finished their program of readings and published their results....it turned out the low readings were within the natural variability of the system.
Ooops press! Think you made a disaster out of nothing.
The Press and Archaeology - Madweasels - 18th November 2010
As Jack says, this is not just a problem for archaeologists. I have a geologist and astronomer among my circle of friends and they complain just as angrily about the quality of reporting of their respective subjects as we do. It is poor, sloppy, lazy journalism - but I doubt that it is a new phenomenon. Ever since there have been circulation wars among the newspapers, the stories need sensation in them. Simple reporting of the facts and interpretations given to them is not enough.
The Press and Archaeology - BAJR - 18th November 2010
THere should be a requirement for training in the press release... good ones
Am giving a seminar tomorrow at the RCAHMS about... yup leaflets, panels and press releases.
to the Scotlands Rural Past groups.. very honoured that they asked me... dead chuffed in fact. BUT the point is, that since being invoveld in Past Horizons, I am more and more understanding of what the press need, and how they will use it. We are part to blame. Wessex and Oxford, York and MolA are good at it... lets learn.
The Press and Archaeology - Madweasels - 18th November 2010
But even MoLA's press release, (http://tiny.cc/nwuyo) which talked about an 'entire Roman landscape' (whatever that means) got morphed by the press into 'an entire Roman town/settlement/village (Google Syon;entire;Roman for loads of examples - very good overall coverage, though). I think I know what the MoLA people were trying to say, but it wasn't that they had found an entire town/settlement/village.
The Press and Archaeology - Dinosaur - 18th November 2010
Long, painful experience suggests that even supplied with a carefully prepared press-release newspapers still get it all wrong. Did a job a decade or so back where there was a press day to show off a really good-looking photogenic bit of a dry dock we'd excavated, which actually got quite a lot of articles in the papers and even a 30 second bit on the local tv news, but staggeringly not a single one of them managed a picture of the thing they'd turned up to see, just random views of the adjacent harbour which they could have just copied from any one of a hundred tourist brochures.... :face-crying::face-crying:
The Press and Archaeology - deadlylampshade - 18th November 2010
I think the quick and simple answer is to translate your article/findings for the press yourself and don't leave it to them to "interpret" what you think is a straightforward and easily understood piece of archaeology. It may be to you but clearly isn't to them. And they have to have a tag or a catch phrase to make the article stick in the readers' minds or else they wont report archaeology any more.
If you don't do it for them, we will continue to have female gladiators and baby murdering brothels!
The Press and Archaeology - BAJR - 19th November 2010
And here we are again:
Is it April 1st again? Have I entered a parallel dimension where silly = research!
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/history/stonehenge-mystery-could-rest-on-ball-bearings-2137673.html
On reading this article, it was so full of holes, that I thought I was reading a sieve. If anyone can point me to "Stonehenge-like monuments in Aberdeenshire" I would love to see them. And having seen the "stone balls" - they are not all as described, - have a look here - most have knobs on them...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carved_Stone_Balls
Anything theoretically possible don't make it right... this is not even theoretically possible
I think we need a daft / ill researched media story thread... end of the year we can give a prize to the worst story.