When I took over as president of NASW at the beginning of this year, I inherited an organization that's robust, in good financial health, and in the process of becoming meaningful to its members not just four times a year when this fine publication arrives in our mailboxes, but every day. My predecessor, Laurie Garrett, has infused NASW with new energy and new ambitions. And our pioneering members on the cyberspace frontier-John Toon, Larry Krumenaker, Bill Thomasson and Bob Finn-have helped shape an organization that's available to "virtually" all members (if you'll excuse the pun) at all hours of the day and night.
Here's what you can expect from me during my presidency. I have two main ambitions. First, I plan to strengthen and solidify NASW's already impressive place on the World Wide Web. Second, I plan to wade into the muddy waters of the NASW constitution, which needs to be rewritten substantially to reflect the changing nature of science writing. A rewrite may seem at first glance to be a bureaucratic task, but I think it's going to be much more than that-in fact, I expect it to be a struggle to articulate what it means to be a professional science writer in the waning years of the 20th Century.
First, let me tell you about cyberspace. As I hope you already know, NASW has maintained two official sites out there in the electronic ether: For many years, we have had a special site reserved for us on CompuServe's Journalism Forum. Most NASW members aren't CompuServe customers, though, so last year we started a site on the World Wide Web as well. It hasn't even been around for a year yet, but it's remarkably successful.
More than 500 NASW members have registered to enter the members-only part of our web site (which you can find at http://www.nasw.org). Hundreds more eavesdrop or participate in the e-mail discussions. And many members automatically receive new job notices by e-mail the moment they are posted. In fact, a major news weekly recruited a new science writer through this job-listing service, and was delighted with the result.
Many members have also discovered the virtues of our e-mail forwarding service-you can send e-mail to rharris@nasw.org and I will always receive it, even if I've changed internet providers. Some members have also taken advantage of the free space we provide for personal web-pages. And our membership roster is available on-line (to members only).
As the success of our web site has soared, we have found that usage of the CompuServe site has dropped off. So at the board meeting in Seattle, we decided to consolidate our efforts in cyberspace by providing one official NASW site. We have said goodbye and thank-you to CompuServe, and we welcome all NASW members to join us on the Web.
I'm sure everyone has read articles or heard stories questioning the value of the World Wide Web... garbage in, garbage out and all that. True, it has yet to prove itself as a tool for commerce. But there's no doubt that the web can be useful to people as citizens-particularly as member of organizations like NASW. There's now a place where any member can ask a question, make a comment, solicit an opinion or simply chat with other members of the profession.The web connects the science writer working alone at home, with those of us in self-important nerve centers like Washington, DC. With the web, we are building a true community of science writers, and it's gratifying to watch this happen. I urge all NASW members to browse the site, post a comment, and to become part of this community.
I think the web site alone is a remarkable achievement for this organization (and I certainly don't claim all the credit for this. In addition to the "sysops" mentioned at the beginning of this letter, we also owe a debt of gratitude to Joe Palca for his strong guidance from the start). But there's more we can accomplish as an organization.
I've been hearing a lot over the past year about our constitution. There are obvious problems, such as an entire category of membership that doesn't include a single member. But there are more subtle issues, too. How should we, as an organization, treat writers who split their time between journalism and writing for institutions? What can we do to alleviate the feeling of some associate members that they are second-class citizens, without threatening the integrity and identity of an organization that's primarily focused on journalism? And how can we clarify our procedures so people feel they are being treated fairly? I've appointed a committee, which I will chair, to take a stab at these questions. We'll recommend some new language, which will be posted on the web site for all members to see and comment upon. Please follow this discussion and participate.
NASW is engaged in other exciting activities. Our Field Guide for Science Writers is a wonderful new book, particularly to give newcomers insights into our trade. Our workshops at the annual meeting have also been fabulously successful (thanks this past year to Paul Lowenberg, Carol Morton, Steve Hart and others). More than 200 science writers trekked to Seattle early to participate in these workshops, and Paul Lowenberg has even more ambitious ideas for next year in Philadelphia. And ScienceWriters is stronger than ever. It's no surprise our membership rolls are growing. These are good days, indeed, for the membership of NASW.
Richard Harris can be reached at National Public Radio, 635 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20001; phone: 202-414-2786;fax; 202-414-3329; rharris@nasw.org.