For the distinguished AP science writer Malcolm Ritter, Tuesday was a day of somber reflection.
"On my 30th anniversary as an AP science writer this week, I found myself interviewing a scientist about a dinosaur known as 'the chicken from hell,'" he wrote on his Facebook page.
It's easy to see how emotional that must have been.
But it shouldn't deter us from extending sincere congratulations to a writer whose consistent excellence and steady hand might put us in mind of Iron Man Cal Ripken of the Orioles. I worked right beside Malcolm for a dozen years, and I can tell you that you will not find a more dependable, capable, or collegial science writer anywhere in our business.
One of Malcolm's colleagues, AP Science Writer Seth Borenstein, sent the Tracker an email with an eloquent description of Malcolm's work that I thought was worth reprinting here, so that I can add that I happily and enthusiastically agree with everything Seth says.
From Seth:
Today is Malcolm Ritter's 30th anniversary at The Associated Press and the world is so much the wiser for it.
Malcolm is not the type to toot his own horn or call attention to himself in any way, unlike many science writers. And it shows in his wonderfully elegant and simple prose. It's never about how clever the writer is with Malcolm. It's about explaining something difficult in a coherent way that doesn't call attention away from the science, but in many ways augments it. In a world of social-media science journalists where it's all about getting clicks, Malcolm is all about getting the phrase, "aah, I get it."
…Malcolm's stories usually sing. Whether it's stem cells, neuroscience, or, this week, post-Big-Bang inflation, Malcolm Ritter's science writing is always spot-on…And I just thought this would be a good opportunity for people to notice.
Even the chicken-from-hell story gave Malcolm a chance to show what distinguishes him from so many of the rest. While others were reporting that scientists had just discovered the grisly chicken, Malcolm correctly reported that this thing (a replica) has been on display at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History for a decade. What was news was not its discovery, but the bestowing of a proper scientific name on it, and the publication of a description and analysis of its anatomy.
It's not easy to do this sort of thing well, and it's not easy to do it consistently for three decades (during which, I might add, Malcolm's hair has turned to what we could respectfully call a lighter shade).
The world is, indeed, much wiser for Malcolm's work.
-Paul Raeburn
Leave a Reply