Before we begin, Jenny, I’d like to give readers a bit of background as to why I think Futurity is a fascinating development in the world of scientific publishing, research administration, science journalism, grant-making and philanthropy, scientific research, academia, consumer health, Web journalism, scientific communication, Medicine 2.0, the e-Patient movement, Open Access, biotechnology, and Science 2.0. There are many implications of a news service run by a consortium of research universities that affect a large range of people and professions. I envision as possible audiences for this interview scientists, science journalists, science bloggers, research administrators, grantors in the sciences and medicine, biotech investors and entrepreneurs, and e-Patients who actively follow news of research developments in areas they have a literally life or death interest in.
An example of the latter instance of the value of your service is the case of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. I am quite interested in that subject and in exploring the Health and Medicine category of Futurity just now I came across the article, “Compound Appears To Slow ALS Progression”, which linked to an Open Access article in a scientific journal.
I start with this example because I think it illustrates the potential of Futurity to contribute greatly to stimulating interest in serious scientific research by directly connecting members of the general public to scientific researchers and highlighting the value of the research the latter are doing to people with real afflictions.
To further illustrate the value of Futurity to everyone involved (the average reader, the researcher, the research university) I would like to point out that I was able to link to the article in Futurity to the actual press release from the University of Rochester Medical Center and there noted that the line, “The work was funded in part by the National Institutes of Health”—that is why I think Futurity should be of interest to grantors. I spend many hours working on the grant and scholarship listing service, ScanGrants and am daily moved and impressed by the important work an enormous number of scientific societies, professional organizations, foundations and companies do in funding research and scholarships in the health sciences and I often wish that the public could learn about the projects funded and about the researchers who devote their talents to attempting to cure or prevent often intractable diseases and to frontline clinicians who daily alleviate suffering. That is what I found really powerful about Futurity as a tool for public education about research and grants-funded projects and why I find the furor (more on that later) about Futurity among science journalists so unfathomable and troubling.
After all, Futurity is a boon to mainstream science journalists and science bloggers (the former, alas, often dismissing the latter as dilettantes and amateurs) in that I was able with a few clicks starting in Futurity to learn in detail about one of the lead authors, Berislav Zlokovic, MD, PhD, of the paper mentioned above and even to find his email address and to learn (and here is the value of Futurity to participating research institutions) about the Center for Neurodegenerative & Vascular Brain Disorders at University of Rochester and even if I so chose to email Dr. Zlokovic directly or to contact the press office.
I was also able to learn that Dr. Zlokovic is a biotech entrepreneur and that the University of Rochester hold an equity interest in several companies he is connected with.
I give the example of Dr. Zlokovic and his work on ALS because it seems to me to demonstrate the value of Futurity to institutions that want to showcase the work their researchers are doing for purely perfectly reasonably PR/promotional and public education purposes, to researchers themselves who want to apprise the public of their own work on subjects of keen professional and intellectual interest to the researchers themselves, to laypeople who are interested in health and science (which is my focus, but you also feature fascinating items in the social sciences) and I hope to grantors whom I would urge to join the consortium and take advantage of your skill in showcasing research projects. I would think that foundations and scientific societies would benefit by being part of your distribution network and from links to their Web sites in stories you publish. Do you have any plans to expand beyond your current base of members of the Association of American Universities (AAU)?
When we started Futurity, we decided to confine membership to AAU universities to keep the numbers manageable. Futurity has grown rapidly, from two dozen members when we launched the quiet phase in June to 42 today.
Futurity members appreciate that there are a number of outstanding research universities that are not AAU members, but they also are mindful that we are learning by doing. The consensus is that we should review the AAU membership requirement, but that we should wait a few months before doing so. I expect that we will discuss it early in 2010.
Also, could you tell us how membership in the Association of American Universities is determined? For instance, as an alum of the University of Pittsburgh and Oregon State University, I was interested that OSU does not seem to be a member of the AAU but that the University of Pittsburgh is, but the latter is not a participant in Futurity. Given that the University of Pittsburgh has an extensive array of research programs I am surprised it is not a member of Futurity. How do you market Futurity to members of the AAU or is that even something you feel you should do? Do you leave membership in Futurity up to them? Are some AAU members taking a wait and see stance towards Futurity and if so, why? Or are you adding new members all the time?
All 62 AAU members are welcome to join Futurity. There is a $2,000 annual membership fee to cover the costs of operating and promoting Futurity. It’s important to note that Futurity’s launch has coincided with a remarkable economic downturn. Many universities, both privates and publics, are facing budget shortfalls and cutbacks. Even so, our membership continues to grow.
We have had inquiries from dozens of universities and research institutes outside AAU and plan to revisit the membership criteria in the coming months.
Now, let’s tackle some of the issues that so perturbed science journalists. Futurity’s appearance on the science journalism scene led to a brouhaha among that much endangered species, professional science journalists.
Ironically, the furor over Futurity actually has helped raise its visibility considerably, no? I heard about it in a email message from a medical librarian who had read some of the news stories. You and I talked on the phone and you said that some of the criticisms were well-taken (such as the fact that many of the stories featured on Futurity had no bylines, which you are now adding to many of your stories). You made the point that you have the utmost respect for science journalists and are not attempting to marginalize or bypass them, but that the fact remains that there are fewer and fewer outlets for science journalism and that research universities have to address the fact that much of genuine news value and scientific interest is not getting out to the general public and that Futurity has a place in the dissemination of news in the sciences and research realms. Do you see anything valid in the arguments of science journalists who would take issue with the statement on Futurity that it is, “…an online news source featuring the latest discoveries from North America’s leading research universities?” What is a “new source” these days, anyway? On the phone, you made the interesting point that many people who work in the press offices of universities and other research institutions are themselves former science journalists who have found positions in academia and are, in fact, highly skillful and knowledgeable about what they are writing about in the press releases they send you (or would you characterize them as news stories?). Could you give us some idea of how the stories are generated and delineate the editing process?
PIOs at universities often work very closely with the researchers to translate the science and communicate why a research finding matters. They have very direct access to the researchers involved and a deep understanding of the science. Because they represent the work of a researcher and ultimately the reputation of the university sponsoring the research, PIOs work very hard to produce accurate and clearly explained reports.
And while media relations is still an important aspect of university communications, many universities are also looking for ways to communicate directly with audiences. Some maintain science blogs and very engaging newsrooms. Futurity is an extension of that audience-directed type of communication.
On the phone, you expressed great sympathy for the plight of science journalists in the age of disintermediation and yet you also have wording on the site that might offend them to a gargantuan degree, “…research universities are among the most credible and trusted institutions in society, and now have the ability to deliver their news and information directly to readers without barriers or gatekeepers.” Do your members regard science journalists as barriers? Could you elaborate on what you mean by barriers? And can you give examples of where gatekeeping in fact hindered the ability of the public to feel any stake in the world of research and to form bonds vis-à-vis donations to institutions or just general good will toward academia and the research enterprise?
The main barrier universities face today is not the science journalists, but the shrinking number of news outlets that cover research news today. We see Futurity as a more democratized approach to research news. Futurity covers research findings in all disciplines, including the humanities, social sciences, as well as medicine, engineering, and the physical sciences. It’s a range of stories you’re not likely to find in many other news outlets.
Do you think science journalists would see relationships such as Dr. Zlokovic, ZZ Biotech and the University of Rochester (where Futurity is located) as an example of something that does require more scrutiny or do you feel that there is plenty of transparency in such instances on Futurity?
Futurity operates very transparently and clearly states the source of all its content, linking back to the original press release. Our mission is to clearly and accurately share research news. Futurity offers an accessible glimpse into where research is today and where it’s headed tomorrow. While it is not meant as a replacement for the kind of synthesis and context that science journalists provide, it is a fantastic way to engage the public’s interest in science and research—and ultimately their support.
Are you an employee of Futurity, of the University of Rochester or both?
I am employed by the University of Rochester, which is subsidizing Futurity by donating my time and hosting the site.
Are these relationships between researchers and spin-offs from research institutions precisely the kinds of connections Futurity can help foster to the ultimate benefit of everyone involved, including patients who might benefit from the commercialization of research that might lead to products that might never have been developed if connections weren’t made and publicity generated via new stories about important scientific advances, such as those of Dr. Zlokovic?
Certainly Futurity can help build connections between investors and researchers, while informing the public about the latest research developments.
As someone who spends a lot of time looking for funding for scientific research, I can only applaud the work you are doing in disseminating news about the subject. Do you see a role for Futurity in interesting the general public and consumers of business news in items about research that might have been too tightly gate kept in the old days of mainstream scientific news reporting?
For instance, does an office of research administration periodically send a press officer around to say, departments of biochemistry, nutrition, neuroscience or computer engineering who then says, “Soooo, anything really innovative happening round here?”
You are the sole staff editor at Futurity at his point, correct?
Yes, but I work closely with my editorial contacts at each university who are asked to send me 1-3 of their best stories each week. They make an initial decision about what to send. My selection process helps to further distill the selections down to the best of the best.
Could you tell us how you determine the news value of each item and how you decide what is an equitable distribution of published stories on Futurity per your $2,000 annual fee members? And that seems a real bargain considering the handsome look of the site and the traction you seem to be getting as a source of news to a wide readership.
We look for stories that are both visually and intellectually compelling. We also look for discoveries that will seem relevant and exciting to the general educated reader. Coverage is based on news value. We do not base postings on quotas.
Can you tell us how you syndicate stories and attract readers and track them?
Please tell us about the use of social media. How do you use Twitter, RSS, FaceBook, etc.?
We are exploring several partnership opportunities with news providers as a way to expand our readership. We’re also active on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube. In fact, Facebook has already become one of our most active referring sites. We’ll continue to look for new and exciting ways to inform the public about research and why it matters.
The site is quite elegant—do you do all the Web design and maintenance yourself?
We’re using WordPress, a blogging platform, to manage the content and site display. I also have support from a Web designer at the University of Rochester who continues to refine the site’s layout and functionality.
How do you determine what fields to cover?
We cover all disciplines.
What is your readership? The educated, sophisticated consumer with an interest in science and society?
The general educated public. Our readers are people who may have read the science sections of newspapers and news magazines, but find that those sections are shrinking or have completely disappeared.
Is it possible to search on Futurity for Futurity stories emanating from specific institutions?
Yes, you can browse by university using the pull-down menu on the right side, by tags, or search by keyword.
And perhaps someday by the funders mentioned in the stories? I would think that the latter capacity would be a boon to funders who want to showcase the interesting research projects they fund. For example, in this story, “‘Conveyor Belt’ Route to Better Vaccines” I noted that one of the funders was the Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation of America. I thought as I read, “Good for the Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation of America for funding worthwhile projects.” I notice that you have a quite elaborate tagging system.
That’s in interesting idea, and one we may want to consider.
I should have asked this earlier in this interview, but I got caught up in how interesting Futurity is: Could you tell us a little about your own personal background?
I’ve been a writer and editor at the University of Rochester for nine years in the communications office. I’ve written primarily for internal audiences (faculty, staff, students, and alumni) both for printed publications and for online distribution.
Who came up with the concept of Futurity? Is it a sustainable model on a sound financial footing? Do you have any competitors? How did its members disseminate research news in the past? How long did it take to get Futurity off the ground? Who have been the key players?
Bill Murphy, the vice president of communications at Rochester, developed the Futurity model in collaboration with several of his colleagues at other member universities. Rochester, Duke, and Stanford have played leadership roles in supporting and managing Futurity’s development and launch. The site launched as a prototype in March and quietly as a beta site in June. We formally launched the site on September 15.
Are you satisfied with how things are going so far? Any major glitches or setbacks?
We’re very excited with the progress so far. We’ll be focusing our efforts in the coming months to promote the site and look for partnership opportunities with other news sites and online content providers.
Thank you for your time, Jenny.
