Filter by author: Niels G. Mede

Harassment, political interference, and violence against science communication are on the rise and pose considerable challenges for scientists, journalists, communicators, and institutions. In this commentary, we — an international group of researchers and practitioners — reflect on how scientists, science communicators and their institutions can balance the increased demand for meaningful public engagement while also appropriately responding to escalating harms of backlash. Drawing on existing literature and lived experience, we interrogate the consequences of attacks on science communication and review available support structures for scientists and practitioners. We propose ways to improve preparedness for and responses to public and political backlash, while considering the challenge of mitigating harassment without silencing valuable public feedback. In doing so, we aim to contribute to a resilient environment for scientists and communicators engaging with publics and to promote a more constructive discourse on socially contested issues in science and technology.

Generative AI like ChatGPT has been diagnosed to fundamentally impact different realms of life. This includes science communication, where GenAI tools are becoming important sources of science-related content for many people. This raises the question of whether people trust GenAI as a source in this field, a question that has not been answered sufficiently yet. Adapting a model developed by Roberts et al. [2013] and utilizing survey data from the German Science Barometer 2023, we find that Germans are rather sceptical about and do not strongly trust GenAI in science communication. Structural equation modelling shows that respondents' trust in GenAI as a source in science communication is driven strongly by their general trust in science, which is largely driven by their knowledge about science and the perception that science improves quality of life.

‘Don’t Look Up’ tells the story of a team of astrophysicists whose efforts to warn politicians, media makers, and the public about an apocalyptic comet impact on planet Earth are undermined by fundamental skepticism toward their expertise. On the one hand, the film offers a rich portrayal of contemporary anti-science sentiments, their societal conditions, and the media and communication ecology surrounding them. But on the other hand, ‘Don’t Look Up’ ignores and exaggerates several facets of those sentiments and the communicative settings in which they spread. This commentary analyzes this contrast through a science communication lens: it scrutinizes the (mis)representation of science denial and science communication in ‘Don’t Look Up’ — and aims to inspire further debate about portrayals of anti-science phenomena and potential remedies within popular media.