Reading the first couple of Awakes for 2013 I think there is a pattern developing.
They have the regular "could it have happened by chance" article on something amazing in nature but they are also interviewing a scientist who is also a Witness. This is a pretty interesting tack on a number of levels.
Firstly it is sending out the implicit message that "look, this educated person accepts creation, the flood and every other account that is at odds with generally accepted science, so that should give you confidence that you are right as well".
Secondly, as a magazine designed for public comsumption is suggests to non-witnesses that there are many well educated people who accept the Bible. This is a potentially a far stronger and more relevent message than an account about some Witness missionary preaching in a jungle or the life story of a Bethalite. Again, it is about perception and managing the message being sent.
The third point is that it also suggests that Witnesses value education to post graduate level. We all know this is absolutely not the case. The two people interviewed so far came into the truth after they had completed their studies. They chose to stick with their careers and not throw in the towel to pioneer, a choice which perhaps has brought them disapproving glances from others yet now they are useful tools to promote WTS propoganda.
Any young witness wanting to follow their course would be looked down on by the vast majority. If they attended university then they would almost certainly lose and appointment or service privilage. If their dad was a pioneer, MS or elder then they would probably lose that appointment. The WTS hates further education and to use educated people in this way is purely a PR exercise.
The final pont is that so far the featured scientists have not been directly involved in highly contentious disciplines such as anthropology, archeology, geology, evolutionary biology etc. Publish an article from a respected anthropologist who is a Witness and has solid answers for how Genesis fits with the fossil record and I will eat my hat. I would love to hear the answers these two and the future participants have to questions about the real harmony of science and Bible.
So, on the one had we have a PR exercise in interviewing these ones. On the other we have regular articles about amazing aspects of nature finished with a plea to emotion and some fuzzy logic about "chance".
Neither of these articles, that will no doubt continue to be regular features, pose any really deep questions about the fundamental disconnects between accepted science and the Biblical record. They certainly don't offer any answers. They are simply fluff and bluster, inconsequential mutterings designed to send a PR message to the outside world and offer hollow comfort to non thinking Witnesses that they are correct to treat every aspect of science with disdain except where Brother Scientist is able to wave the WT flag.