|
Details of the
winners are here.
This year judges sifted through 150 entries. We had some extremely high
quality entries which are reflected in tonight's shortlist. But I have to
say that we we concerned about the general standard of entries. I think this
is partly a reflection of the fact that we've raised the bar. As I said last
year, we are rewarding more than good clear pieces of writing and
broadcasting.
Like the Oscars, Emmies and Baftas our aim is to reward brilliance and
inspiration. Now more than ever - in this age of information overload - we,
as a community, need to sort the wheat from the chaff. To pick out those
things that are truly important. To not follow the pack - to have a bit of
attitude and to go against the grain. We also want to encourage you to tell
stories brilliantly, with inspiration and creativity. With bravery and
flair.
This was the criteria for making it on to our shortlist. We done to those
who made it to this stage.
And so if I take each category in turn......
In our first category for the best feature on a science subject in a
national newspaper. We have some of the best national newspaper
correspondents in the world. And so as you might expect we received entries
that were wonderfully written topical and to the point. You do all know how
to tell stories. It was a tough choice but we selected those that rose above
the ordinary.
The same was true of our second category. In our second category, for the
best feature on a science subject in a specialist periodical. It's
one of my favourites to judge - the periodicals have a bit more room and
more licence to explore a greater diversity of subjects. Again a general
high quality of writing and flair.
This was the first year for our award for investigative and original
journalism. I introduced it last year because I felt that our role now
was to be more sceptical and to challenge the scientific process. We
received numerous entries - many brilliantly executed - but only two that we
felt had really dug deep. As Lord Beaverbrook once famously said "Good
journalism is something that someone somewhere wants to conceal - everything
else is advertising". We will continue with this category - because we want
to encourage more of you to do stories that are difficult - and to stick
your noses into places where they're not wanted. Lets get some scoops next
year!
The general standard of the radio category was as ever generally
very high - and proved to be the most difficult to shortlist. But those that
made it to the short list - and in particular the winning entry - were in my
view among the best radio reports I've ever heard.
Alas the same can't be said for the TV entries. Those that were
shortlisted were of a high standard and gripping. But The judges found in
the main the bulk though well produced - were obvious. I wonder how much of
this is due to the challenges that some in this room face in getting
material commissioned - particularly on BBC2. The better entries were in the
main channel 4 commissions. On the plus side we do have a new controller for
BBC 2.
And I have to say the standard of entries for the web were good - but
not brilliant. That's why we decided against shortlisting. I know there's
good stuff out there - that makes good use of the media - and is capable of
inspiring and uplifting. We need to do much more to ensure that these pieces
are entered.
But our science in a non-science context category continues to
develop well. It's aim is to encourage good science reporting in non-science
or news programming. Again there were a handful of extremely good entries -
and the winning entry was startlingly good. But they were the exception
rather than the rule.
I also want to add that next year the ABSW in conjunction with BBC radio
science will be introducing a new category - Young Science Broadcaster of
the Year. We hope to work with science and journalism courses across the
country and offer this award as a goal for students engaged in tv and radio
projects. The aim is to help develop the next generation of broadcasters. It
is an opportunity to do good and it appeals to me because it's very much in
tune with the BBC's and ABSW's public service values .
We will launch the awards this September at the BA science festival and we
will be inviting entries from young broadcasters and students for work
produced this year.
The judges
No awards scheme could take place without judges; the ABSW is truly
fortunate to attract judges of the highest calibre each year. They give
freely of their time & energy, and it gives me the greatest pleasure to
thank the panel on your behalf:
Sponsors
Of course, these awards take a significant commitment, and on behalf of
the ABSW, all the entrants and everyone here tonight, I'd like to thank
our sponsors for their support, without which there would be no
Awards.....so thank you to GSK, the MRC, the Royal Society and the
Wellcome Trust. (Applause). |
