[meteorite-list] Fact Sheet - Possible Media Solution?

From: John.L.Cabassi <John_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 07:18:43 -0700
Message-ID: <000001ca0169$554af4d0$a166fea9_at_anitak9bz49jy2>

G'Day List
A lot of good suggestions, but you might want to look at taking some
lessons from the politicians, they are really good at balking at
questions =)

Cheers
John

-----Original Message-----
From: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
[mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of Bob
King
Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 6:30 AM
To: MeteorHntr at aol.com; Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Fact Sheet - Possible Media Solution?


Hi Steve,
Since I work at a newspaper as a photographer and understand your
frustration, I think a fact sheet is a great idea. Reporters would
really appreciate an FAQ-style, one sheet resource. Here are my
suggestions on what to include:
* Your name and phone number plus one or two other sources to reach and
their numbers
* Definition of meteor, meteorite, meteoroid, asteroid
* Average speed of meteor/meteorite as it enters our atmosphere and then
strikes the ground
* Average price of the most common type of meteorite (ordinary
chondrites) found in a typical fall plus the range as you mentioned
* Common misperceptions about meteorites: they're hot, they come down
flaming, they're all worth a million dollars.
* Where meteorites come from and why they're important to science
* Where to send a suspected meteorite to be tested

I hope this helps.
Bob

On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 8:06 AM, <MeteorHntr at aol.com> wrote:
> Hello List,
>
> I was greeted this morning ?with a front page story in the Baltimore
> Sun. While it could have been ?worse, it made me realize I need to do
> something to help writers focus on the ?facts and the real story and
> not to slide over and just use the more sensational ?answers or
> comments given in an interview.
>
> Also, some reports do ?actually attempt to do more research on their
> own before writing, and sometimes ?they interview amateurs that are
> even better at saying not-so-smart things like ?those of us with
> experience are also so good at doing.
>
> As Darryl ?mentioned the other day, reporters tend to resist writing
> from a Press Release ?and usually will work to manufacture their own
> story from the ground up based on ?what they uncover in their
> interviews.
>
> So maybe a solution might ?be a "Fact Sheet" I can have preprinted to
> give to the reporters at each ?interview.
>
> Of course, if I am not asked a certain question by a ?reporter, there
> is a greater chance I won't offer that fact in my ?interview. ?Or if I

> do, it can be out of the context of the interview and ?the reporter
> might not understand why what I said was important.
>
> Time is ?often a restraint, both in the interview and in the writing
> to meet a deadline, ?so it isn't always the reporters fault that they
> don't get around to asking the ?questions that would paint a clearer
> picture.
>
> Maybe a Fact Sheet could be ?in a F.A.Q. fashion? ?Or just stated as
> Facts, billet style?
>
> So, I ?would like some help from you guys.
>
> I would like some suggestions as to ?what should be included in a fact

> sheet, so that when handed to the reporter, ?they can refer to it
> during and/or after the interview as they might ?need.
>
> For starters, I can list my name and contact information, that ?would
> be good. (Nothing worse than one's name being spelled wrong in the ?
> paper.)
>
> I can list my correct age (which is 43 not 42 as erroneously ?stated
> in today's story). ?Which does make you pause, if a reporter can't ?
> get someone's age correct, is it any wonder that other aspects of the
> story ?might get skewed a little (or a lot) one way or another. ?
> However, in the ?case of Robert Haag in the Astronomy story a few
> years back, they listed him as ?40 years old and not 50 years old. ?A
> "typo" I am sure! ;-) ?(Or as ?someone hinted, maybe a little slice of

> Zagami under the table might have helped ?that typo to not be spotted
> in time!)
>
> How about "Why are meteorites are ?valuable to science?" Q, with an
> appropriate and pithy answer. ?After all, ?if it wasn't for the
> science, we really wouldn't have much in the way of higher ?demand for

> many of our meteorites.
>
> Of course, there is a collectors ?market. ?And while the words
> "treasure" and "hunter" together can give a ?negative connotation,
> they can give an adventurous one as well. ?And we all ?have to admit,
> while it is not all just for the money, that does play at least a ?
> part in why those of us in the field do what they do. ?How can the
> fact ?that we are also hunting for the source of knowledge, not just
> cash be ?stated?
>
> I suppose I could go through all the media stories I have seen ?lately

> and pull out the errors and try to find out why the reporter might
> have ?got the reporting of it wrong. ?Then find a way to stress, in
> the Fact ?Sheet, what is the correct take should be on it.
>
> For example, after ?talking about how most meteorites are "common" and

> don't offer all that much ?valuable new information, others do. ?I
> went on that some are far more ?desirous to researchers than others,
> and to collectors as well. In that context ?I mentioned that
> "meteorites can be worth from 5 cents a gram up to over $1,000 ?
> dollars a gram."
>
> There seemed to be some negative reaction from the York ?newspaper's
> story here on the M-List where that range was mentioned. ?Well, ?now
> the Baltimore reporter (who was in the same interview as the York
> reporter) ?decided to drop the range I had given and just somehow
> averaged it all out to: "hundreds of dollars per gram" instead. ?
> Probably shorter and easier that ?way for him. ?I am sure his editor
> appreciated it being shorter, in fact, ?maybe it was his editor that
> shortened it for him.
>
> Of course, factually ?both reporters are not incorrect as to the
> values, and doing a search on any ?dealer website and on ebay shows
> both of those statements to be factually ?correct. ?However, maybe I
> can state that a fact on my Fact Sheet that ?majority of all
> meteorites are worth from $0.20 to $2 per gram. ?And that ?certain
> factors determine why they might be worth more or less than that ?
> range.
>
> Any other suggestions?
>
> Oh, I would imagine Ruben might ?suggest that I add that "Fossils are
> not found in meteorites."
>
> Any ?others?
>
> Steve Arnold
> of "Meteorite Men"
>
> **************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2

> easy steps!
> (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221323031x1201367232/aol?red
>
ir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&hmpgID=62&b
cd=
> JulystepsfooterNO62)
> ______________________________________________
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
______________________________________________
http://www.meteoritecentral.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Fri 10 Jul 2009 10:18:43 AM PDT