When you consider the knowledge that you gain, you must consider that it is not tangible to the naked eye of one who may pass you by. I learned from a young age that asking questions, whether it be simple or out of the ordinary, you will gain from that experience. As humans we all experience things and have a knowledge that can only be expressed and shared if evoked. Expressing interest is an option but the likelihood is very low. As Kathy speaks of in her talk, we are now spending roughly 10-13 hours in front of a screen. When we are curious we search through google or stumbleupon what we have interest in. We are shared information about whats new and hip in the news. I personally believe that we are no longer gaining from our own curiosity for this reason.
You must now consider science and how that relates to this situation. Science, as we continually say, must be simplified due to the fear that the word brings to people. Last week I spoke about how I do not believe science can be restored in people. I continue this week with the notion of what science and the knowledge we gain can do to those around us. More specifically our challenge of writing science to better the "common good". Science clearly has a bridge that separates the interested and the non-interested. I do not believe that we can "restore" the interest of people but I do believe that as writers we can give science away for the better of people. When it comes to science, I do have that curiosity that I learned as a kid, but it is my duty to connect to those who don't.
How do we do this? It is easy to say we must simplify it but I believe it goes beyond that. We need to write in a fashion that opens the eyes of the audience to the benefit that can come from it. Writing must be personal but also very connecting to many worlds. I will use the example that I learned in Marketing class. When asked what marketing does for someone who may become a banker or a scientist or a journalist, few understood what answer the professor was looking for. Until the concept of Marketing products in the business world was set aside. The benefit of the subject came from the various reasons marketing can help a human in the real world. Marketing oneself for a job, Strategies to make one's work relevant, etc. Rather than discussing the way to make a breakthrough product, we learned that marketing goes beyond the business world.
If we can transfer that concept to the curiosity and intentions of a reader/audience then we can capture the real benefit of science to the real world. People do not want to read about sickle cells if they do not understand them. But if we can bridge the gap with multiple connections to the outside world, I believe we may benefit that reader. Would a business man really benefit from sickle cell reporting in the newspaper? Maybe not directly, but that same business man may now have a step up on a client that has a similar background or interest.
This is a very complex challenge because science tends to be filled with very challenging topics that relate to very few. As writers we need to worry less about informing the reader about, using the same example, sickle cell research and more about how they can advance for reading it. If we are in a world that moves a million miles a second via monitor screens and handheld devices, we must make it known that reading is not a waste of time. Expressing that benefit to the average Joe is not easy, but I believe people are only as curious as the middle man (us) make them. No longer does one ask out of the blue to gain that random knowledge you may never experience or "stumble" upon. We certainly can do our best to change that!
No comments:
Post a Comment