Search

Sep 22, 2014 Commentary

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

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.

Volume 13Issue 032014

Sep 22, 2014 Article

War, anxiety, optimism and triumph: a study on science in the main Brazilian TV news

by Yuri Castelfranchi , Luisa Massarani , Marina Ramalho

We analysed the representations of science and of scientists at Jornal Nacional, the main Brazilian TV news. We carried out content and frames analysis, besides the lexical and semantic analysis of the transcriptions of the science and technology stories. Our results show a narrative that highlights the novelties and the epopee of the scientific advance, mainly in the health field. But to the emotional palette feelings of combat, anxiety and triumph were added. The face of the scientist presented by the TV news is mainly masculine, suggesting a stereotyped role of the male and female scientist: meanwhile men go out to literally explore other worlds, women take care of health and of the body.

Volume 13Issue 032014

Sep 22, 2014 Commentary

The changing rationale of science communication: a challenge to scientific autonomy

by Frank Marcinkowski , Matthias Kohring

We argue that the institutionalized push communication of academic institutions has become the dominant form of public science communication and has tended to force other forms and functions of science communication into the background. Given the new schemes of public funding, public communication of science now primarily serves the purpose of enabling academic institutions to promote themselves in a competition that has been forced upon them by the political domain. What academics working under these conditions say about themselves and their work (and what they do not) will depend crucially on the strategic communication goals and concepts of the organizations to which they belong. We surmise that the inherent logic of this form of science communication represents a potential threat to the autonomy of scientific research.

Volume 13Issue 032014

May 06, 2014 Commentary

Socially inclusive science communication

by Luisa Massarani , Matteo Merzagora

Social inclusion is an emerging preoccupation in the science communication field. The political value of science communication (e.g. in terms of empowerment) and the necessity to address all audiences has always been considered, but in recent times the participation agenda has enriched the rationale and methodologies of the communication of science: social inclusion is not only an issue of access to knowledge, but also of governance and co-production.

Reframing social exclusion from science communication: moving away from ‘barriers’ towards a more complex perspective

by Emily Dawson

Knowledge◦rooms — science communication in local, welcoming spaces to foster social inclusion

by Barbara Streicher, Kathrin Unterleitner and Heidrun Schulze

Science Centers. Which role can they play to participate in a city social reconstruction?

by Claudia Aguirre Rios

Straight into conflict zones, scientific research empowers the minds

by Leïla Perié, Livio Riboli-Sasco and Claire Ribrault

Volume 13Issue 022014

May 06, 2014 Editorial

Shared spaces: a future for JCOM

by Emma Weitkamp

As academic communities across the globe are increasingly encouraged to share their knowledge outside the ivory towers of academia, it becomes ever more important to create a bridge that crosses continents and disciplinary boundaries. Sitting, as it does, at the nexus between science communication practice and research, JCOM has a vital role to play as just such a knowledge sharing platform.

Volume 13Issue 022014

May 06, 2014 Commentary

Reframing social exclusion from science communication: moving away from ‘barriers’ towards a more complex perspective

by Emily Dawson

Science communication is an increasingly important field of activity, research and policy. It should not be assumed however, that science communication practices provide equitable and empowering opportunities for everyone. Social exclusion, inclusion and equity are key challenges for practitioners, researchers, policy makers and funders involved with science communication. In this commentary I reflect on the limitations of the ‘barriers approach to understanding social inclusion and exclusion from science communication and argue instead that a more complex perspective is needed. I conclude that placing equity at the heart of science communication is crucial for developing more inclusive science communication practices.

Volume 13Issue 022014

May 06, 2014 Commentary

Knowledge◦rooms — science communication in local, welcoming spaces to foster social inclusion

by Barbara Streicher , Kathrin Unterleitner , Heidrun Schulze

Socially inclusive science communication has to take place where people spend most of their time — within their communities. The concept of knowledge◦rooms uses empty shops in socially disadvantaged urban areas for offering low-threshold, interactive science center activities. The commentary carves out essential features that contributed to the success of the pilot project. Most importantly, the knowledge◦rooms had to be welcoming and comfortable for visitors of various backgrounds. The spaces were easy to access, the initiators were seen as trustworthy actors by temporarily becoming part of the community and the offer was respectful of the time and knowledge of its users.

Volume 13Issue 022014

May 06, 2014 Commentary

Science Centers. Which role can they play to participate in a city social reconstruction?

by Claudia Aguirre Rios

Science centers are seen as places for communication of science very focused on the mise en scène of the content and methodologies of natural sciences. However, in the recent history, these institutions are transforming their role within education and transformation processes in the society they are engaged with. This communication presents a social project in Medellín, Colombia, that involves a vulnerable community, the local authorities of the city, academic institutions and NGO’s and a science center that is neighbor to this community.

Volume 13Issue 022014

May 06, 2014 Commentary

Straight into conflict zones, scientific research empowers the minds

by Leïla Perié , Livio Riboli-Sasco , Claire Ribrault

Sharing scientific knowledge in conflict zones may not sound like a priority. Still science communicators can contribute to address social issues by inviting people to experience research practice, engaging them in scientific questioning and constructive dialog.

Volume 13Issue 022014

Apr 08, 2014 Article

Framing engagement: expert-youth interaction in a PES event

by Sampsa Saikkonen , Esa Valiverronen

Previous studies on public engagement with science have identified various difficulties in the encounters between experts and lay people. However, there is a scarcity of research investigating expert-youth interaction. In this paper we focus on the interactive framings of an informal PES event. Based on a case study involving a climate change panel discussion and a simultaneous online chat, both aimed at young people, we discuss the multiplicity of framing. Further, we look for “misbehaviours” which challenge the rationality and norms of the event. Our findings indicate that the frame of deliberative participation is very fragile.

Volume 13Issue 022014

Search results