I think I get it now

I have been in a number of health communication forums and seminars where the topic of conversation will come to public relations and the media. Many scientists and medical researchers have a contentious relationship with the media. They admire the idea of disseminating their research to the public, but they hate the way journalists oversimplify the significance of their findings. Journalists don't seem to appreciate nuance and degrees of change. Public relations officials don't fare much better. Medical schools and private foundations love to promote the life-altering research they fund, but the public relations people exaggerate and paint things in such a way to generate media buzz, and in the process lose the true meaning of the results found.

Given my own journalistic background, I always nodded sympathetically at these scientists' lament. But I tried to defend the journalists and p.r. professionals. "They are working with a limited amount of print space." "They have to get the readers attention." "Most newspapers aim for a sixth grade reading level."

But I think I get it now. I have been working on a community outreach event at the Medical College. Our goal is to bring community members in for an awareness event to get community leaders input on our upcoming project to improve communication with parents about newborn screening. But the p.r. hacks are more concerned about what we can do to get t.v. crews there. I don't really care about t.v. crews. I want to publicize the event to the public so that we can get some input and support from the people our project most affects. It's about the research effort and making a difference in the lives of patients. It's not about looking good for the camera.

I get the frustration now.