scholarly journals The price of trust — a response to Weingart and Guenther

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (06) ◽  
pp. Y01 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane Gregory
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Historical Period ◽  
Scientific Culture ◽  
The Public ◽  
Professional Science ◽  
Innovation Economy

In response to Weingart and Guenther [2016], this essay explores the issue of trust in science communication by situating it in a wider communications culture and a longer historical period. It argues that the popular scientific culture is a necessary context not only for professional science, but also for the innovation economy. Given that the neutrality of science is a myth, and that science communication is much like any other form of communication, we should not be surprised if, in an innovation economy, science communication has come to resemble public relations, both for science and for science-based innovations. The public can be sceptical of PR, and may mistrust science communication for this reason.

scholarly journals On the roles of scientists, press officers and journalists

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (03) ◽  
pp. E ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Weitkamp
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Research Institutions ◽  
News Production ◽  
The Public

This issue of the Journal of Science Communication raises a number of questions about the ways that new scientific research emerges from research institutions and in particular the role played by scientists, press officers and journalists in this process. This is not to suggest that the public don't play an equally important role, and several articles in this issue raise questions about public engagement, but to explore the dynamics at play in one specific arena: that of news production. In this editorial I explore the increasing reliance of science journalists on public relations sources and consider what questions this raises for science communication.

scholarly journals Promoting Public Engagement of Natural History Collections through Science Communication

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. e28479
Author(s):  
Bryan Lessard
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Natural History ◽  
Public Relations ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Public Speaking ◽  
Wide Audience ◽  
The Public ◽  
Natural History Collections ◽  
New Students

Natural history collections are essential for understanding the world’s biodiversity and drive research in taxonomy, systematics, ecology and biosecurity. One of the biggest challenges faced is the decline of new taxonomists and public interest in collections-based research, which is alarming considering that an estimated 70% of the world’s species are yet to be formally described. Science communication combines public relations with the dissemination of scientific knowledge and offers many benefits to promoting natural history collections to a wide audience. For example, social media has revolutionised the way collections and their staff communicate with the public in real time, and can attract more visitors to collection exhibits and new students interested in natural history. Although not everyone is born a natural science communicator, institutions can encourage and provide training for their staff to become engaging spokespeople skilled in social media and public speaking, including television, radio and/or print media. By embracing science communication, natural history collections can influence their target audiences in a positive and meaningful way, raise the profile of their institution, encourage respect for biodiversity, promote their events and research outputs, seek philanthropic donations, connect with other researchers or industry leaders, and most importantly, inspire the next generation of natural historians.

scholarly journals Showrooms as a Window to Science Based Innovation

2015 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-26
Author(s):  
Michael Boronowsky ◽  
Tanja Woronowicz ◽  
Peter Hoffmann ◽  
Sangin Boboev
Keyword(s):  
Science Communication ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Innovation Capability ◽  
Scientific Concepts ◽  
The Public ◽  
Technological Developments ◽  
New Ideas ◽  
Professional Science ◽  
Scientific Results ◽  
Stakeholder Communication

Abstract Scientific results benefit from more tangible stakeholder communication. Showrooms are a tool to transform abstract scientific concepts into solution-oriented and less complex demonstrators. The basic idea of a showroom implies a smart expo and meeting place to demonstrate the latest technological developments in a comprehensive and interactive manner and to stimulate transfer of scientific results to practice. Presentation of new technologies can be an eye opener of what can already be done today. But it is just more than this as it can put discussion with interested stakeholders to a new level - allowing to think beyond this - paving the ground for innovation. This way a showroom stimulates very substantial discussion about future ideas with real involvement of industry and society. Involving the public via a showroom environment is also helpful for the diffusion of new ideas, leading to potential faster market take-up, when new solutions are put into reality. Furthermore the interaction with the public is a stimulus also for the scientist, raising a much better understanding about current and future needs. Capability is understood as a measure of the ability of an entity (organization, person, system) to achieve its objectives in relation to its overall mission professional science communication is part of the capability of, e.g., a university. Innovation capability in this sense refers to the ability of a set of regional stakeholders from academia, political authorities, public administrations and industry to innovate in synergy for economic and societal development – showrooms are an important tool to achieve this.

scholarly journals Harnessing the Persuasive Power of Narrative: Science, Storytelling, and Movie Censorship, 1930–1968

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. Kirby
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Public Relations ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Deficit Model ◽  
The Public ◽  
Persuasive Power ◽  
History Of ◽  
To Come ◽  
Communication Approach

ArgumentAs the deficit model's failure leaves scientists searching for more effective communicative approaches, science communication scholars have begun promoting narrative as a potent persuasive tool. Narratives can help the public make choices by setting out a scientific issue's contexts, establishing the stakes involved, and offering potential solutions. However, employing narrative for persuasion risks embracing the same top-down communication approach underlying deficit model thinking. This essay explores the parallels between movie censorship and the current use of narrative to influence public opinion by examining how the Hays Office and the Catholic Legion of Decency responded to science in movies. I argue that deploying narratives solely as public relations exercises demonstrates the same mistrust of audiences that provided the foundation of movie censorship. But the history of movie censorship reveals the dangers of using narrative to remove the public's agency and to coerce them towards a preferred position rather than fostering their ability to come to their own conclusions.

scholarly journals Research institutions: neither doing science communication nor promoting ‘public’ relations

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (03) ◽  
pp. C03 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michel Claessens
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Internal Communication ◽  
Research Institutions ◽  
High Quality ◽  
The Public ◽  
Proper Sense ◽  
Scientific Staff ◽  
Genuine Communication

In this commentary I explain why research institutions are neither doing science communication nor developing ‘public’ relations in the proper sense. Their activities are rather a mix of different things, serving various purposes and targets. However, dealing with PCST, their main responsibilities [should] include: promoting genuine communication and dialogue, being open and accessible to the public, providing high quality scientific information, ensuring good internal communication and educating their scientific staff.

scholarly journals Science Communication 2.0

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 42-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dra. María Dolores Olvera-Lobo ◽  
Lourdes López-Pérez
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Public Universities ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Scientific Culture ◽  
Online Newspapers ◽  
The Public ◽  
Spanish Science ◽  
The Media

The level of scientific culture among young Spaniards is one of the lowest in Europe. The media, as spokespersons to the public, and public universities, as the institutions responsible for higher education, are two important parties with the responsibility for changing this situation. This study analyses how both use the Internet and Web 2.0 to promote science. In the case of universities, the results demonstrate the effort they are making to connect science to these tools. 72.9% have a scientific news feed and almost a third have a profile on Facebook and Twitter. However, the role of Spanish science is still irrelevant in online newspapers. Only 35.4% of published information refers to research in Spain.

scholarly journals More than "mountain guides" of science: a questionnaire survey of professional science communicators in Denmark

2010 ◽  
Vol 09 (02) ◽  
pp. A02
Author(s):  
Kristian Hvidtfelt Nielsen
Keyword(s):  
Questionnaire Survey ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Web Based ◽  
The Public ◽  
External Relations ◽  
Positive Statements ◽  
Professional Science ◽  
Deductive Science ◽  
Danish Science

This article sums up key results of a web-based questionnaire survey targeting the members of the Danish Science Journalists' Association. The association includes not only science journalists but also other types of science communicators. The survey shows that science communicators have a nuanced and multidimensional view on science communication, science, and technology. Science communicators are thus more than the "mountain guides" of science, as a recent definition describes it. The survey respondents are not just interested in helping the public at large to a wider recognition of scientific knowledge, but also want to contribute to democratic debate and social legitimisation of science and technology. The respondents exhibit a certain amount of optimism in relation to science and technology, yet also take a sceptical stance when confronted with overly positive statements regarding science and technology. Finally they have a predominantly social constructivist perception of science and technology when it comes to external relations to society, while they lean towards a hypothetical-deductive science understanding when it concerns the internal dynamics of science

scholarly journals Bringing back the debate on mediated and unmediated science communication: the public's perspective

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (03) ◽  
pp. A10
Author(s):  
Ana Delicado ◽  
Jussara Rowland ◽  
João Estevens
Keyword(s):  
Science Communication ◽  
Public Consultation ◽  
Scholarly Research ◽  
The Public ◽  
Clear Preference ◽  
Multiple Factors ◽  
Perceptions And Attitudes ◽  
Professional Science

When analysing the actors of the science communication ecosystem, scholarly research has focused on the perceptions and attitudes of scientists, science journalists, and science communicators. How the public envisages the roles of science producers and mediators is mostly uncharted territory. We address this gap, by examining the results of a public consultation in Portugal concerning science communication. We show that the public demonstrates a clear preference for science communication performed by scientists, over journalists, although credibility and trust depend on multiple factors. We also ascertain that professional science communicators are mostly invisible, though the public recognises the value of `translators'.

scholarly journals The shift from public science communication to public relations. The Vaxxed case

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (02) ◽  
pp. C02 ◽  
Author(s):  
Davide Bennato
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Public Science ◽  
The Public ◽  
Communication Processes ◽  
Scientific World ◽  
Understanding Of Science ◽  
Communication Dynamics ◽  
Dynamics Of Science

Social media is restructuring the dynamics of science communication processes inside and outside the scientific world. As concerns science communication addressed to the general public, we are witnessing the advent of communication practices that are more similar to public relations than to the traditional processes of the Public Understanding of Science. By analysing the digital communication strategies implemented for the anti-vaccination documentary Vaxxed, the paper illustrates these new communication dynamics, that are both social and computational.

5 reasons why research projects should communicate their science

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Heidenreich
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Public Attention ◽  
Positive Side ◽  
Professional Science ◽  
Scientific Results ◽  
Funding Opportunities ◽  
The University ◽  
The Impact

<p><strong>1. Science communication is relevant when it comes to getting a project approved.</strong> This applies not only to nationally funded research projects, but also to science within the Horizon Europe framework. A solid communication concept is not only a great advantage when it comes to project approval. Science communication can also increase the impact within the research community.</p><p><strong>2. Science communication increases the impact of a project.</strong> The impact of a project is primarily assessed on the basis of publications in scientific journals. Scientists also read newspapers and watch television - and surf the Internet. Without the appealing presentation of research results, they would not necessarily become aware of studies outside their own specialist area. More and more researchers are on social networks such as Twitter and find out about new articles via their timeline. So thanks to social media, it's becoming easier to share publications online. </p><p><strong>3. Science communication improves collaboration within a project.</strong> A positive side effect: especially in large collaborative projects in which researchers are involved in very different disciplines, the project partners can communicate better if the different research approaches and goals are flanked by professional science communication. In their interview study “What do scientists gain from science communication?”, science communication scientists from the University of Münster asked 75 scientists from two interdisciplinary research networks and found that science communication stimulates the exchange between colleagues, imparts knowledge about research in other disciplines, provides an overview of research in the network and promotes the establishment of personal contacts among colleagues.</p><p><strong>4</strong>. Thanks to science communication, <strong>research reaches people outside of the science community</strong>. The more clearly presented, the more interest is aroused. But we hardly need to explain that to you as the guests of this session. The communication of scientific results on the effects of plastic in the ocean caused the largely invisible phenomenon of plastic littering has now received enormous public attention and is currently perceived as one of the greatest threats to the marine environment. Many research projects that want to initiate societal change can only achieve their goals with public relations.</p><p><strong>5</strong>. Often the decisive factor: <strong>there is funding for science communication</strong>. In everyday science, this is a crucial prerequisite for science communication to take place. Research projects can acquire additional resources and hire professional science communicators to support outreach. Therefore, the scientists can concentrate on their research. The talk will include a brief overview of the funding opportunities that are available for science communication in the EU.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document