Science can be communicated to the public in a huge number of different ways. According to Karen Bultitude, a science communication lecturer at University College London, these can be broadly categorised into three groups: traditional journalism, live or face-to-face events and online interaction.[1] Traditional journalism (for example, newspapers, magazines, television and radio) has the advantage of reaching large audiences; this is way most people regularly access information about science.[1][2] Traditional media is also more likely to produce information that is high quality (well written or presented), as it will have been produced by professional journalists. Traditional journalism is often also responsible for setting agendas and having an impact on government policy.[1] The disadvantages of traditional journalism include that, once a science story is taken up by mainstream media, the scientist(s) involved no longer has any control over how his or her work is communicated, which may lead to misunderstanding and misinformation.[1][3] Also, this method of communication is one-way, so there can be no dialogue with the public, and science stories can often be reduced in scope so that there is a limited focus for a mainstream audience, who may not be able to comprehend the bigger picture from a scientific perspective.[1][3] The second category is live or face-to-face events, such as public lectures (for example, UCL's public lunch hour lectures – museums, debates, science busking, sci-art, science cafes and science festivals. The advantages of this approach are that it is more personal and allows scientists to interact with the public, allowing for two-way dialogue. Scientists are also better able to control content using this method.[1] Disadvantages include the limited reach, it can also be resource-intensive and costly and also, it may be that only audiences with an existing interest in science will be attracted.[1]
The third category is online interaction, for example, websites, blogs, wikis and podcasts can also be used for science communication, as can social media. Citizen Science or crowd-sourced science (scientific research conducted, in whole or in part, by amateur or nonprofessional scientists) is another way that the internet can be used for science communication.[1] Online methods of communicating science have the potential to reach huge audiences, can allow direct interaction between scientists and the public, and the content is always accessible and can be controlled by the scientist. Online communication also allows for both one-way and two-way communication, depending on the audience’s and the author's preferences. However, there are disadvantages in that it is difficult to control how content is picked up by others, and regular attention and updating is needed.[1]
Research has shown that members of the public seek out science information that is entertaining, therefore it is important to bear this aspect in mind when communicating scientific information to the public (for example, through events combining science communication and comedy, such as Festival of the Spoken Nerd).[2] Since the field of science communication is still new, more research is needed to identify exactly how and why the public engages, and what the impact of science communication through journalism, events or online actually is.[3][4]
- ^ a b c d e f g h i Bultitude, Karen (2011). "The Why and How of Science Communication" (PDF). Retrieved 25 October 2016.
- ^ a b Ipsos-MORI. "Public Attitudes to Science 2011" (PDF). Retrieved 27 October 2016.
- ^ a b c McCartney, Margaret (2016-01-25). "Margaret McCartney: Who gains from the media's misrepresentation of science?". BMJ. 352: i355. doi:10.1136/bmj.i355. ISSN 1756-1833. PMID 26810502.
- ^ "Science for All: Report and Action Plan from the Science for All Expert Group" (PDF). February 2010. Retrieved 29 October 2016.