An official website of
by Katie McGrath-Novak
Throughout this summary, you’ll find relevant follow-up resources in gold boxes.
Over the past three months, I’ve enjoyed thought-provoking and engaging discussion with dedicated forestry communicators across Colorado through the Selective Science Communications Practice Group.
Between March and May 2024, the Selective Science Communications Practice Group convened monthly as a ‘safe space’ for collaborative communicators to work through real challenges and opportunities together related to selective science issues in social media, face-to-face conversations, and the news.
The group formed in response to our August 2023 Branching Out session, hosted by our friends Hannah Brown and Brett Wolk from the Colorado Forest Restoration Institute, titled “Panning for Nuggets of Science Gold: Reframing Forestry and Wildfire Management Communication.” We heard that the tips and tricks shared in this webinar were inspiring, and there was an appetite to practice them. Thus, the Selective Science Communications Practice Group was born!
Resource: Click here to watch the recording of our August 2023 Branching Out session, “Panning for Nuggets of Science Gold: Reframing Forestry and Wildfire Management Communication”. The slides are available here.
To set the stage:
We started our first session by “getting uncomfy” – participants had the opportunity to think outside of scientific perspectives to understand the values that emerge in common selective science narratives. Here are some of the values that participants have seen:
We also left our comfort zones by turning a critical eye toward our own communication strategies and ways that we have perhaps unintentionally contributed to selective science narratives in the past. Participants were asked, “What words, phrases, or narratives have you used in your science communication that may have been confusing or misleading?” Here were some of the responses:
We reflected on how these terms are not necessarily wrong or bad, but that when over-generalized and applied without relevant local context, they can actually contribute to selective science narratives. Additionally, several of the words and phrases (such as ‘treatment,’ ‘forest management,’ and ‘restoration’) do not have standard definitions that most audiences can agree on and understand.
There is a difficult balance to strike between too much and too little information. As one participant pointed out, “We can’t give everyone a Bachelor’s degree in Forestry through a social media post.” While it is not feasible or necessary to share every fact, we also don’t want to oversimplify by leaving out important local considerations. Ultimately, several participants agreed that they will continue using some of the words and phrases listed above sometimes, but will be more mindful of making sure they include more nuance when they do.
In breakout groups, participants were asked to consider: 1) How could some of the confusing or misleading words and phrases listed above be improved?; and 2) Are science, values, decision-making, and narratives mutually exclusive?
Here were a few key takeaways from the breakout discussion:
The remaining time in session 1 was spent in breakout groups drafting real responses to various social media comments.
Resource: Worksheet to help develop social media comment responses
We used the following guiding questions to help develop social media comment responses:
Resource: Guiding questions to help determine when to respond to social media comments
Both groups determined that it’s not always necessary to respond to every comment. They wondered how to make the decision to engage, leave the comment alone, or delete the comment. Though there is no real formula to determine which action to take in a given instance, here were a few factors the group identified that can help guide a decision:
We finished the session with a discussion about goals. Participants identified the need to really think through the goal of social media. Consider what your organization hopes to gain from social media, and use that to guide how to best spend your time managing social media.
Resources:
For our session on face-to-face conversations, I gathered a few articles about how to have difficult political conversations, because I realized that selective science conversations can sometimes feel similar to political conversations at the dinner table at family gatherings. Participants were asked to read at least one of the following articles before attending the session:
A few consistent themes that I noticed across most of the ‘how to have a good political conversation’ articles included:
| Empathy | Remember that your conversation partner is a whole person, not just their opinion. |
| Be a good conversation partner | Listen and consider what the other person is saying, rather than just focusing on crafting your next rebuttal. |
| Set a goal | What’s the point of this conversation? To convince? To be convinced? To understand each person’s perspectives? |
| Ask questions | Be genuinely curious about why they feel this way, and what their underlying concerns/values might be. |
| Stay calm | It is okay to embrace silence, or to take a breath if you feel you are getting worked up – there is power in pausing. |
In our first breakout discussion for this session, I asked participants:
Tell the group about a time you felt like you failed in a face-to-face conversation. What went wrong? What emotions did you feel? What could you have done better? What advice does the group have?
When we returned to full group discussion, I asked everyone to share a key takeaway, insight, or lingering question from the breakout session. Here are some of the responses I received:
With these takeaways in mind, we spent the next portion of the session running through roleplay prompts in pairs.
After this activity wrapped up, I once again asked participants to share a key takeaway. Here are some of the takeaways:
Resources: Media Training
Below are a few resources we found with tips for communicating with media:
Here are a few recurring themes that I noticed across many or all of the articles listed above, as well as some additional points that participants shared from their own experiences:
Our discussion began by asking folks with experience doing media interviews to share what it was like for them, and if there is anything they would add to the recommendations above.
Here are a few key points we gathered from that discussion:
People emphasized:
People added:
After hearing some wisdom from the recommended readings and participants with experience doing media interviews, we split into breakout groups to practice writing key points for a media interview. The worksheet we used was adapted from the worksheets below.
Resources: Worksheets to help you prepare key points for media interviews
Groups had 30 minutes to draft some possible talking points, and then we regrouped for a discussion. Here’s some wisdom folks gleaned from the activity:
Resources that workshop participants recommended, specifically on wildfire-related communications:
Thanks to all who participated in our 2024 Selective Science Communications Practice Group!
