Physicists Have Long Written Op-Eds. You Can Too.

We live in an era defined by a strange paradox. On one hand, information has never been more abundant, available instantly from all corners of the internet. On the other hand, truth, drowned out by misinformation, appears more elusive to a greater number of people than ever before.

The timing probably seems grim. Trust in public institutions is waning. The free press is shrinking. Crises like climate change loom.

But the timing is also right for us scientists to speak up. As both a scientist and a journalist, I believe scientists can and should seek out opportunities to share their views and their research, and writing op-eds and serving as sources for journalists is one place to start.

The decline of traditional newsrooms has been playing out for decades, but the rise of the internet and social media have accelerated this decline in recent years. The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, The Atlantic, The Wall Street Journal, ABC News, NPR, and countless more outlets have all cleaved journalists from their ranks in the last few years.

Science news sources have been hit, too. Last year alone, National Geographic laid off all its staff reporters, and Popular Science ended its 151-year-old magazine. As an atmospheric scientist who interned at The Washington Post, I’ve seen many science stories fall by the wayside because a small handful of staff writers were overloaded with assignments.

Cuts to science journalism are felt especially deeply at local newspapers. One study projected that, by the end of this year, the U.S. will have lost a third of the newspapers it had in 2005. This will leave more than half of American counties with only one or no local news sources at all, dramatically diminishing local science reporting.

This is bad news for everyone because independent journalism is a salve against misinformation about science. And on the issue of climate change, this is especially bad news for communities of color, which suffer disproportionately from its impacts.

While they cannot replace independent journalists, scientists do have a unique ability to provide accurate, timely, and relevant perspectives that can fill in the gaps.

One way is by contributing opinion pieces, which scientists have been doing for decades. Consider the 1955 Russell-Einstein manifesto, a public plea about the dangers of nuclear bombs, which was written and signed by leading scientists amid the Cold War. “Many warnings [about hydrogen bomb warfare] have been uttered by eminent men of science and by authorities in military strategy,” it read. “We have found that the men who know most are the most gloomy.”

Or consider more recent examples, like nuclear physicist Frank von Hippel’s New York Times op-ed highlighting the need for improved nuclear power safety and U.S. regulatory reform. You could read, too, the op-eds by geophysicist and climatologist Michael E. Mann, who has written in national outlets, like The Washington Post and The Los Angeles Times, on the science and impact of climate change.

Scientists also have much to say on the broader science enterprise, including its people and communities. Astrophysicist Jedidah Isler argued in The New York Times in 2011 that Black students should not have to justify their presence in academic settings, including physics classrooms. Atmospheric scientist Gregory Jenkins argued in Newsweek in 2023 that tackling climate change requires a deep commitment to understanding and prioritizing global climate injustice. Last year, physicist Jacinta Conrad, with the help of APS staff, argued in the Houston Chronicle for the importance of legislation supporting international students and scientists.

Physicists have long been keen observers of and advocates for science funding, too. In the last few months, for example, APS members — with the Society’s support — have published at least seven op-eds in local newspapers across the country, from Maine to Montana, arguing for robust funding for federal science agencies.

In the same way that none of these individuals were born scientists, none were born writers. They merely worked hard to excel at this kind of storytelling, and I think more scientists can and should do the same. By writing op-eds for national and local news outlets, scientists can help bridge the gap between the scientific community and the public by demystifying scientific topics, shaping public opinion, and informing policy decisions.

For many scientists, writing op-eds seems daunting, but there are plenty of resources to help get started. The first and most important task of this work is identifying and honing your story. You can start by asking yourself a few questions: What do you know, why does it matter, and why are you the right person to talk about it? Think carefully about how your scientific background can add insight or a unique perspective to a timely (and timely is key!) societal issue. Focus on developing a story that will resonate with a wide audience, not just those in the scientific community.

In drafting an op-ed, understanding the basics of “pitching” — that is, suggesting your article idea to a news outlet — is also crucial. Media outlets, like newspapers, usually get many pitches, so sticking with best practices will help you get noticed.

This requires shifting some of the communication standards we’re trained with in science. Every field has its jargon, and it takes practice to recognize and strip out jargon while retaining precision and accuracy. It also takes practice to find examples and analogies that translate complex facts into digestible takeaways.

At the same time, facts alone will rarely persuade a skeptical audience, a common shortcoming of traditional scientific communication. Instead, personal storytelling is essential in making scientific issues tangible to the public. This is often a challenge for scientists, who are frequently taught to stay impersonal and objective — to take the “I” out of it. But in writing op-eds, who you are informs the reader why your opinion counts, so talking about yourself, as a scientist and human being, is vital.

Op-eds, which have inherent bias, cannot replace excellent independent journalism. But op-eds aside, scientists play another indispensable role by serving as sources for science journalists. If you’re not ready to dive into writing op-eds, you can still be a resource for a journalist.

Of course, journalists will not always tell a story the way we want it told. Their job is to get all the facts, and our job is to share the facts we have. But it is both a responsibility and a privilege to contribute in this way to such a vital institution, and in such precarious times.

So, whether you’re summarizing research to a seasoned journalist or penning your own op-ed, just start the process! Read the resources available to you (starting with the sources below), and reach out for advice. Then pick up your pencil and get writing.

If you’re looking for tips and tricks to work with journalists and you work at a research institution — whether a university, national laboratory, or company — your institution’s media relations or press office is the best place to start.

To share and get feedback on an op-ed idea you have that might be suited for the APS News opinion column or another venue, contact the APS News Editor at letters@aps.org.

Additional resources:

The OpEd Project, including its introduction to pitching

The SciCommers Network

SciLine for Scientists

The views expressed in interviews and in opinion pieces, like the Opinion page, are not necessarily those of APS. APS News welcomes letters responding to these and other issues.