Some of the claims about the significance of “Darwinius masillae” may be premature.

By TIM ARANGO


It is science for the Mediacene age.

On May 19, researchers unveiled a 47-million-year-old fossil they say could revolutionize the understanding of human evolution at a ceremony at the American Museum of Natural History in New York.

But the event, which coincides with the publishing of a peer-reviewed article about the find, is the first stop in a coordinated media event, orchestrated by the scientists and the History Channel, including a film detailing the secretive two-year study of the fossil, a book release, an exclusive arrangement with ABC News and an elaborate Web site.

“Any pop band is doing the same thing,’’ said Jorn H.
Hurum, a scientist at the University of Oslo who acquired the fossil and assembled the team of scientists that studied it. “Any athlete is doing the same thing. We have to start thinking the same way in science.’’

The specimen, designated Darwinius masillae, is of a monkeylike creature that is remarkably intact: even the contents of its stomach are preserved. The fossil was bought two years ago in Germany by the University of Oslo, and a team of scientists began work on their research. Some of the top paleontologists in the world were involved in the project, and it impressed the chief scientist at the Natural History museum enough to allow the press conference.

“We would not go forward with this, even in a hosting capacity, unless we had a sense of the scientific importance,’’ said Michael J.Novacek, the provost of science at the museum.

But despite a television teaser campaign with the slogan “This changes everything’’ and comparisons to the moon landing and the Kennedy assassination, the significance of this discovery may not be known for years. An article in PLoS, a scientific journal, reports more prosaically that the scientists involved said the fossil could be a “stem group’’ that was a precursor to higher primates, with the caveat, “but we are not advocating this.’’

All of this seems a departure from the normal turn of events, where researchers study their subject and publish their findings, and let the media react as it saw fit. But this campaign is only the latest example of the scientific media blockbuster, of which the National Geographic Society has become perhaps the most successful practitioner. It often gives grants to researchers, with National Geographic gaining the rights to produce television shows and magazine articles related to any discoveries.

And these kinds of publicity campaigns can backfire. In 2007, for example, the Discovery Channel ran a documentary called “The Lost Tomb of Jesus,’’ which had its share of scholarly detractors.

Executives of the A&E Television Networks, which operates the History Channel, said they were mindful of that example, and were satisfied that the science behind the fossil discovery was solid.

The media facets to the project began to coalesce last summer, when an A&E executive met in London with Anthony Geffen, a filmmaker and the chief executive of Atlantic Productions, who had been secretly working on the film with Mr.Hurum.

“I made the decision pretty close to on the spot,’’ said Abbe Raven, the chief executive of A&E. “Unearthing a piece of history like this is unbelievable. To do it on television is incredible.’’