A paper gets picked up by a journalist or a university press officer, and the first email back is some version of “do you have a high-res photo we can use?” This is the moment a lot of labs realize their only available photo of the PI is a low-resolution headshot from a conference badge five years ago, or a group photo where half the current lab members aren’t even in it. A media kit, assembled once, in advance, when there’s no deadline pressure, solves this permanently.
What actually needs to be in it
A useful lab media kit is short: two or three high-resolution photos (a PI headshot and a photo of the team or lab space), a two- or three-sentence description of the lab’s work written for a general audience rather than a grant panel, a logo if one exists, and a short list of any past press coverage. That’s the entire list. Labs sometimes try to build something more elaborate — a full press page with multiple sections and bios for every member — and end up never finishing it, which is worse than a simple version that actually exists.
The description should already be written
The single most useful thing a media kit does is save the PI from writing a lab description under time pressure while also trying to answer a journalist’s actual questions. That plain-language description doubles as good material for the about page too, so writing it once solves two problems at the same time. It should describe what the lab studies and why it matters in terms a non-scientist would understand, not the language from the lab’s own papers.
Photos matter more than most labs assume
A blurry or outdated photo is the single most common reason a journalist has to email back and ask for something better, which either delays the story or means the lab ends up represented by whatever stock-photo-adjacent image the outlet finds instead. A decent phone photo taken in good light, at the phone’s highest resolution setting, is genuinely good enough for most online coverage. What matters is that it’s current, in focus, and shows the people who are actually in the lab now — not the production value.
It also helps with a paper gets media attention moment specifically
When a paper does get outside interest, the lab usually has hours, not days, to respond before the journalist moves on to another source. Having the photo and description ready to send immediately, rather than needing to track down a current photo or draft a description from scratch, is often the difference between the lab actually appearing in the coverage and being quietly dropped from it.
Where it should live
A single page on the lab website, linked from the about page, with the photos set up as direct downloads rather than requiring an email exchange to get the files. It doesn’t need a dedicated spot in the main navigation — most visitors will never need it — but it should be easy for the PI to find and send a link to in thirty seconds when the request comes in.
The upkeep is minimal
Once built, a media kit needs updating about once a year, or whenever the team changes enough that the group photo is noticeably out of date. That’s a fifteen-minute task, not a project. The return on that fifteen minutes shows up exactly once, at the moment a reporter asks for a photo with a same-day deadline, and the lab already has one ready to send.
Common questions
What exactly should be in a lab media kit?
A few high-resolution photos of the PI and the team, a one-paragraph lab description written in plain language, a logo if the lab has one, and a short list of past coverage. That's enough to answer almost any journalist request without a scramble.
Where should the media kit live?
A single page on the lab website, linked from the about page, with the images available as direct downloads. It doesn't need its own section in the main navigation, just a findable, stable link a journalist can be pointed to directly.
Do we need professional photos, or will phone photos work?
A good phone photo, taken in decent light with the format set to the phone's highest resolution, is usually sufficient for online media even if it's not print quality. What actually disqualifies a photo is being blurry, oddly cropped, or years out of date, not the camera it was taken on.
How often should the media kit be updated?
Once a year is enough for most labs, or any time lab membership changes significantly. The main risk isn't the kit going stale in style, it's a photo showing someone who's since left the lab, which creates an awkward correction request from whoever used it.