Every year a colleague of mine does a presentation to the new intake for the mass-media science fellows course at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Her talk always includes a serious warning. Science writing is a treacherous, cut-throat world, she tells the prospective journalists, and there are few full-time jobs. “Are you sure you want to do this?” she asks, pausing before she adds: “Because I don't need the competition.” In all honesty, this pitch could just as easily apply to scientists in general as to science writers — in either case, landing a full-time job straight after a PhD is difficult.

My friend's indoctrination talk would have been welcome at the inaugural meeting on scientific publishing in Bremen, Germany, last month. The meeting, organized by charitable foundation Bertelsmann Stiftung and the German Journalists' Federation, brought together scientists, policy-makers and journalists. But it did not offer specific advice on how to succeed in the field — just as scientists often receive little career advice at conferences, beyond the latest in scientific advances.

The turnout for the meeting, some 350 people, was a mix of established and aspiring science writers. Such a range gave a strong indication of the need for advice and information — especially as the economics of science-writing has caused a general shift from full-time jobs to freelance opportunities (see Nature 432, 418–419; 2004).

But there were some hopeful signs after the conference. Two German newspapers, Die Zeit and Süddeutsche Zeitung, are launching science sections this month. And career talks for scientists are now de rigueur at most US-based scientific conferences. I'm sure my colleague would agree that more of the same in Europe — for both traditional and off-the-bench scientific careers — would facilitate some welcome competition.