Redalyc.SCIENCE, ITS PUBLICS and NEW MEDIA. REFLECTING
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Mètode Science Studies Journal ISSN: 2174-3487 [email protected] Universitat de València España Brossard, Dominique SCIENCE, ITS PUBLICS AND NEW MEDIA. REFLECTING ON THE PRESENT AND FUTURE OF SCIENCE COMMUNICATION Mètode Science Studies Journal, núm. 4, 2014, pp. 193-197 Universitat de València Valencia, España Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=511751359025 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative MONOGRAPH MÈTODE Science Studies Journal, 4 (2014): 193-197. University of Valencia. DOI: 10.7203/metode.80.3123 ISSN: 2174-3487. Article received: 12/12/2013, accepted: 09/01/2014. SCIENCE, ITS PUBLICS AND NEW MEDIA REFLECTING ON THE PRESENT AND FUTURE OF SCIENCE COMMUNICATION DOMINIQUE BROSSARD Scientifi c journalism faces the challenge of adapting not only to new formats but also to new information exchange dynamics. New online platforms, making it easier to access and produce scientifi c content, are forcing science publics to evolve. The online environment has turned into science communication reality, and both scientists and communicators must adapt to it. This paper discusses these changes and their implications for science journalism and an informed citizenry. Keywords: science communication, science and social media, online communication, public understanding of science. In 1967, Nirenberg argued in an editorial for Science scientists themselves are now embracing roles that magazine that «decisions concerning the application were conventionally taken upon by trained science of [genetic] knowledge must ultimately be made communicators. In short, the online revolution has by society, and only an informed society can make made a profound impact on science communication such decisions wisely» (Nirenberg, 1967). Nirenberg (Brossard, 2013; Brossard and Scheufele, 2013). The was referring to scientifi c advances in biochemical goal of this paper is to discuss these changes and their genetics. Almost 50 years later, his quote is more implications for science journalism and an informed than ever relevant. Rapid scientifi c developments citizenry. in innovative fi elds such as synthetic biology, geo- engineering and nanotechnology, to name just a few, ■ CHANGES IN MEDIA PLATFORMS raise ethical, legal and social questions that require more than ever an informed citizenry. However, the The news environment is facing tremendous changes, traditional source of scientifi c knowledge for lay with traditional newspapers shrinking and social audiences, scientifi c journalism, media booming. As science is facing challenges posed by the columns continue to disappear rapid development of the Internet from mainstream newspapers’ «THERE IS NO SHORTAGE OF (Dudo et al., 2011). platforms, traditional science- Science journalism (as all SCIENCE CONTENT ONLINE public channels rapidly journalism nowadays) faces the FOR THOSE WHO CARE TO deteriorate (Dudo et al., 2011). need for adaptation not only FIND IT. AND EMPIRICAL This does not mean that science to new dissemination formats, EVIDENCE SUGGESTS THAT content is not available for but also to new dynamics interested parties. In the mid- AUDIENCES DO GO ONLINE of information exchanges. 2000s, the second generation of Consumers of science news FOR SCIENCE CONTENT» Internet-based services (i.e. Web can access online content from 2.0) became widely accessible virtually anywhere and can to online users. These social now produce science content themselves on social networking sites, wikis and other communication media platforms. Lay audiences can easily get tools made scientifi c topics easy to share and discuss. involved in online deliberations regarding questions One can now fi nd science content on YouTube (a that were traditionally discussed mainly in scientifi c Google-owned video-sharing site created in 2005), spheres or in science popularization media. And on Facebook and Google Plus (the two largest MÈTODE 193 MONOGRAPH The Science of the Press social networking sites respectively established those provided by Google (Google news) or Yahoo in 2004 and 2011), on Wikipedia (a free online (myYahoo) are becoming increasingly important encyclopedia created in 2001) and on many other and are the most popular way to fi nd news online online platforms. More signifi cantly, blogs devoted to (Olmstead et al., 2011). Similar aggregator tools are science content have been multiplying in the online offered as «apps» (applications) on iOS and Android environment. These blogs are hosted by specialized mobile devices, with Pulse and Flipboard being two science magazines (such as Scientifi c American or of the most used ones. Individuals can easily follow a Popular Science), online mainstream newspapers specifi c science topic and get regular updates through or independent sites. Non-traditional, «online only» a wide range of providers. In sum, there is no shortage sources of science news are increasing in number of science content online for those who care to fi nd and credibility. For instance, Inside Climate News it and with multiple ways to access it. And empirical – a seven staff non-profi t blog devoted to news- evidence suggests that audiences do go online for related climate change – won the 2013 Pulitzer science content. prize for national reporting, a clear indication that these newcomers have joined the rank of respectable ■ EVOLUTION OF SCIENCE PUBLICS media organizations. Further, numerous blogs are now directly reporting on peer-reviewed scientifi c At the end of 2011, 2.3 billion Internet users worldwide research. In 2012, the online organization Research (i.e., one out of three individuals) had access to the Blogging registered over 1,200 active blogs focusing Internet (International Telecommunication Union, on analyses of peer-reviewed studies for the benefi t of 2012). Although different patterns can be detected lay audiences (Fausto et al., 2012). for different countries and cultures – for instance, A number of prominent American science writers Germany and France continue to show a relatively have moved from large, mainstream papers to write strong loyalty to traditional news brands, i.e., print for science blogs or online-only newspapers and television, science sources (Economisti- compared to other developed Associati, 2011). But the «MODERN SCIENCE countries – reliance on digital development of science blogging news is steadily growing, COMMUNICATION SHOULD points to an evolution of science particularly among younger communication extending LEVERAGE ONLINE audiences who in majority favor beyond changes in reporting MARKETING STRATEGIES online sources for their news practices and dissemination SUCH AS KEYWORD (Newman and Levy, 2013). And formats. A signifi cant number OPTIMIZATION TOOLS these younger cohorts are turning of science blogs is developed away from traditional news AND ONLINE SEARCHING and maintained by scientists brands even if these also have an themselves (Colson, 2011). A DYNAMICS» online presence. Across countries, recent study among scientists online users aged 45 and under at a top research university are consistently more likely to in the United States found that 16% of scientists use social media and aggregator brands as their news blogged at least once a month about topics related sources (Newman and Levy, 2013). In some countries to their research and close to one out of fi ve tweeted (Spain, Italy, urban Brazil and the U.S.), alternative about their research on the microblogging platform news formats (i.e., blogs and other social media) are Twitter (Brossard et al., 2013). These telling numbers now the preferred source of news across all age groups indicate a change in the cultural outlook toward online (Newman and Levy, 2013). public communication activities within the scientifi c Audiences for science news follow the same community. Indeed, younger scientists do tend to patterns. More and more, individuals are going support direct communication with lay audiences to digital platforms to follow science topics and (Corley et al., 2011), a trend confi rming the cultural traditional brands are less and less the main provider change mentioned above. of science news. A recent study among the American Last but not least, it should be mentioned that population found that although 62% of individuals searching and monitoring the Internet on a wide still turned to traditional brands (either in print, variety of topics has become a regular practice, with broadcasted, or online) for science news, patterns Google being the favored search engine (Anderson drastically changed when different age groups were et al., 2013). Online news aggregators, such as considered. Over 50% of those relying exclusively 194 MÈTODE MONOGRAPH The Science of the Press issues, material that can be obtained anywhere and with relatively limited effort (Brossard, 2013). Although one might argue that this content is not always of quality, this is overall good news for science communication as it increases the likelihood for individuals to easily fi nd science content. Interested individuals can follow science «live» and through multiple sources as issues develop, and less interested individuals can get exposed to science news indirectly through friends’ posts on Facebook or elsewhere. Indeed, as I indicated earlier on, the production and distribution of the news has been