Explaining Science to the Media

The memory of the 2014 water crisis is still fresh in the minds of many people in the Toledo, OH area.  Anything related to harmful algal bloom in Lake Erie will make to the news one way or the other.  Yesterday, I was asked to explain the research published in this paper to two local TV channels.  In my mind, the goal of the work was to use better statistical method to reduce measurement uncertainty.  To introduce the work without touching the term Bayesian statistics, I talked about how decision under uncertainty often result in the lack of confidence in the final choice. The lack of confidence is often the reason for less effective communication between the decision maker and the public.   In this case, uncertainty made explaining the "Do Not Drink" order very difficult.   The difficulty, in turn, led to the lack of communication between the city and the public, resulting in public anxiety and second guessing about the order later.  When implemented, our method can result in a more confident decision, thereby, help the city to better communicate with the public.  The final cuts from both TV stations present the problem with a single question, did the City of Toledo make the right call in issuing the "Do Not Drink" order?  They effectively conveyed my message without mentioning words like "risk communication" and the reasoning behind my answer to the question.  Our training in scientific writing does not help us in explaining science to the public.  I have a lot to learn from reporters.  By the way, the news cast seems to show that I know how to operate the ELISA test.  This was, in fact, the first time I touched an ELISA kit.