My reply to a journalist on science communication

First read this article by a journalist on science communication here: http://www.scidev.net/global/communication/practical-guide/what-jou...!

My reply: Interesting article. I myself faced a few scary situations. After giving a lot of time to a journalist to explain things, some years back, I was shocked to read the article based on my work and opinion because they were twisted, cut short, I was quoted out of context to the extent that everything I wanted to be written was lost in translation! I was deeply disappointed and never dealt with any journalist again. I myself write the articles now. But I have noticed to my horror that the editors started editing things removing the important points and making the articles highly irrelevant! I am fed up with all these things and now write my stories and those of other scientists myself and post on my own network. Yes, I became a 'journalist' (science writer) too!
I think the journalists and editors I dealt with didn't really understand what is important and what is not in my work and articles. Hence used the scissors indiscriminately. Deadlines are death knells for science communication!
And I would like to think about an issue before answering a question - to make sure that it is put properly and with ease. So quick responses in telephone conversations can mix up things. Therefore, I prefer E-mail interviews which give me some time to think. Yes, I would like to see the article before publication so that the journalist doing my story gets it right!
I think most of the scientists agree with me.
Krishna