Writing Science Opinion

Editors don't like caveats so sometimes subtleties of science get lots in the editing
Originally the norm was that if an article is on day X then the writer turns in a final draft the day before and the editor makes modifications never showing the modifications to the writers. Emily and the other science writers changed this so that they submit articles 2 days ahead of time so that they always get to see and approve the editor's changes.
Daily Texan focuses on local stories which can be difficult when writing about the environment which is naturally a global subject.
Editors do a good job of catching jargon and pulling it out of the article.
Point-Counterpoint articles where two authors tackle the same subject are fun but difficult to plan because authors don't usually know what each other are writing.
Authors can't assume anyone has ever read one of their previous articles so continuity and on-going big picture pieces are difficult.
Editors don't pressure Emily to insert controversy or to present two sides of an argument when there aren't two legitimate sides but as an opinion writer Emily is forced to take a clear side which can be difficult on subtle subjects where the scientific jury is still out.
As an undergrad Emily was required to take writing courses both in her field and outside of her field which she found very useful. Despite her success and enjoyment with these courses she isn't sure if everyone should be required to take similar writing courses.
Ideas for articles come mainly from other articles in papers and science columns.
Full citations are not allowed in the Texan. When Emily does try to slip in citations these generally get changed to "researchers say..." by the editor.
Authors never really know how many people are reading their articles. Some readers post comments online but most readers don't.
Picking topics Emily asks herself, "If I could tell everyone something about what I do what would it be and how can I get the idea across in 1 sentence."
Out of approximately 9 columnists 2-3 write science articles.
Correcting errors can be very difficult because there isn't much dialog once the article is published. Retractions are rarely printed and in very small font when they are. Also authors are forbidden from commenting on their own articles online.
Research is checked in 4-5 papers or journal articles (statistics often move faster than journals so in hot fields research often comes from newspaper articles). 3-4 hours of research for every 1 hour of writing.
Authors do not get to write their own titles. Emily submits titles with her articles but often the title comes from a "headline person".
For papers (and media in general) it's easier for them to reach out to or cite people who are already visible. This can make it difficult to get science opinion in the paper since many scientists don't put themselves out there in the public eye.