Opening talk by K.C. Cole, Los Angeles Times

By Elise Kleeman

Really good science writers need to lie, cheat, and steal, said K. C. Cole in the first plenary of the workshop. She outlined 15 rules for writing in her talk, but focused most on the value of lying.

Not to say Cole advocated pure fabrication. Sometimes the best way to explain a topic is to cut out the detail and focus on a few main points, she said. "What I've been talking about is sins of omission."

A really good caricature, even though it's not exact and leaves out a lot, means more than an exact portrait," Cole said. Likewise, a story should capture the reader with powerful explanations of the most important points rather than losing them in a sea of complicated, though more accurate, detail.

A prime example of how detail can impede clarity is in the use of science jargon, she said. Jargon might be tempting to use because it is so precise, but it can be so specific that even scientists studying the same topic have problems understanding each other.

At a string theory conference in Aspen, Cole asked one theorist what another theorist meant by 'bubbles of nothing.' "He said 'I have no idea,'" Cole recounted.

Even if researchers can't always answer her questions, it's in part Cole's willingness to ask them that makes her such a good science writer. Often, older writers stop asking simple questions because they don't want to feel stupid any more, she said. The best science writers keep their innocence, and ask away. This gives them a solid understanding of the subject, allowing them to explain topics more clearly and to write with more confidence. "Dare to be stupid," Cole told the audience.

If a reporter is familiar with the interview topic, even advertising that proficiency can impede his ability to get good material. Despite her considerable experience and knowledge, Cole said she does not "show off" during interviews. Scientists often step up the complexity of the conversation if they think the interviewer will understand them, resulting in a dearth of usable quotes.

This is no excuse to skip background research before interviews, though. "The stupid questions come from science writers who haven't taken the time to read the background," she said.

And once the interviews are over and it's time to start writing the article, steal! Beginners often feel that they need to come up with all their own metaphors, Cole said. But writers should take advantage of the imagery available in books written to explain science to the general public. "The real sin is if you hear a good idea and you don't steal it," Cole said, quoting mathematician Viktor Weisskopf.

Cole's last rule for writing was to emote. Critics decry getting too excited about a topic as "gee-whiz reporting," she said, but it shouldn't be a bad thing. Science advancements don't need to be reported solely because they might become useful. There is joy in science beyond its applications, the joy of understanding something new, said Cole.

Cole's own pursuit of learning and understanding has led her far from her beginnings as a political science major reporting on Eastern Europe. She has written numerous books explaining science and is working on another about her mentor, Frank Oppenheimer, founder of the Exploratorium in San Francisco. Cole is a science writer for the Los Angeles Times, but has also written for magazines and newspapers including the New Yorker, the New York Times, and Discover, and discusses science in television and radio programs as well.

Her list of 15 rules also included such advice as waste people's time ("Don't be afraid to keep asking questions until you understand"), eschew objectivity, and quote out of context ("Quotes are always out of context").

Dave Perlman