ABSTRACT
When an environmental disaster erupts, whether it a spill, explosion or a natural catastrophe, reporters can find that details can be difficult to obtain. Ultimately the goal for both journalists and the public is to understand the risks or dangers. Usually that comes down to understanding the science behind the situation. Science depends on replication; it is the essence of what builds knowledge. Scientists call this the weight of the evidence. Research is considered more valid and legitimate when it is both peer-reviewed and published in a science or technical journal. A number of programs have been developed in both universities and in professional science organizations to train scientists to be better speakers both to audiences and in interviews with journalists. In addition, they have mounted programs designed to monitor and report on the accuracy of a journalist's reporting on science and the environment.
