Reading through numerous popular reports about scientific and healthcare innovations, it is obvious that authors portray their writing differently, depending on the type of discovery, how the author wants to appeal to the audience, and knowledge of the topic.

If I had to author an article in the NY Times or a comparable periodical on a scientific paper, I would make sure that the content both caters to a broader audience and educates readers at an appropriate level. I would make sure to state the main points discussed in the scientific paper, but expand on them in a little more detail. This way, readers will clearly understand what the paper is about, while also gaining more insight on the paper’s synopsis, through graphs, data, and quotes from the scientists and researchers involved.

Other than simplifying scientific jargon, including data from the scientific paper and any vital details not in the abstract, introduction, or conclusion will make the popular media report a good representation of the scientific research.

When writing about science, the authors should definitely know what they are writing about. They need to thoroughly read the scientific research to be able to paraphrase and simplify the paper for a popular media report. From what I have noticed, a lot of authors do not include data or any other specific findings in their report. That is something the author should absolutely touch on to make the report more educational.

Looking at all of the presentations, it surprised me that the degree of detail and scientific jargon in the reports were mixed. I would have expected the authors to know the research and include that important information. However, based on the source of the popular reports, I could see why some authors write in the style that they do. Regardless of how much information the author includes, the ultimate goal is to appeal to as broad of an audience as possible.