Among the most interesting aspects of the changes in the media ecosystem a leading role is played by the impact of digital and networking technologies on the ways news reports are built. In this Jcom commentary, the issues of the relationship between digital storytelling and professional news production will focus on science journalism. The commentary will deal with theoretical reflections and practical examples of innovative experiences in which different narration methods were exploited for scientific information.

The globalised digital media ecosystem can be characterised as both dynamic and disruptive. Developments in digital technologies relate closely to emerging social practices. In turn these are influencing, and are influenced by, the political economy of professional media and user-generated content, and the introduction of political and institutional governance and policies. Together this wider context provides opportunities and challenges for science communication practitioners and researchers. The globalised digital media ecosystem allows for, but does not guarantee, that a wider range of range of contributors can participate in storytelling about the sciences. At the same time, new tools are emerging that facilitate novel ways of representing digital data. As a result, researchers are reconceptualising ideas about the relationship between practices of production, content and consumption. In this paper I briefly explore whether storytelling about the sciences is becoming more distributed and participatory, shifting from communication to conversation and confrontation.

Based on the stories collected in the essay La Scimmia che Vinse il Pulitzer. Personaggi, avventure e (buone) notizie dal futuro dell’informazione [The Monkey Who Won the Pulitzer. Characters, Adventures and (Good) News from the Future of Information, translator’s note] here we provide an outline of the main trends in the current digital information scenario. Beyond the much feared crisis of information, we are actually witnessing the appearance of a great number of initiatives and projects which attempt to keep last century’s journalism values alive (though with many economic contradictions). Any journalist, even in the science field, who is interested in communicating in an innovative way can rely on a set of instruments – from the timeline to live coverage, passing through fact-checking – which can change the reporter-reader relation.

At first glance it all seems so easy – scientists create new knowledge, and through their work they show which statements about the world are true and which are false. Science journalists pass these new discoveries on so that as many people as possible can learn about them and understand them. Prior to publication, it is the job of "fact checkers" to examine the journalists' texts to ensure that all the facts are correctly represented. In reality, however, the relationship between the actors is by far more complicated. Using my experience as fact checker of scientific texts for the news magazine "DER SPIEGEL", I would like to comment in this essay on where I see the main problems of fact checking in scientific journalism to be, and on the changes that have come about through the use of the Internet and the availability of smartphones and tablet computers.

Innovation processes are rarely smooth and disruptions often occur at transition points were one knowledge domain passes the technology on to another domain. At these transition points communication is a key component in assisting the smooth hand over of technologies. However for smooth transitions to occur we argue that appropriate structures have to be in place and boundary spanning activities need to be facilitated. This paper presents three case studies of innovation processes and the findings support the view that structures and boundary spanning are essential for smooth transitions. We have explained the need to pass primary responsibility between agents to successfully bring an innovation to market. We have also shown the need to combine knowledge through effective communication so that absorptive capacity is built in process throughout the organisation rather than in one or two key individuals.

Currently, science is developing rapidly and its influence on society is more significant than ever. This is all the more reason for today’s scientists to interact with the general public. To design effective science communication activities, we must understand scientists’ motivations and barriers to publicly communicating science. In this study, we interviewed 19 early-career scientists who had participated in science cafes in Japan. From these interviews, we identified five factors leading to their reluctance to participate in science cafes: 1) troublesome or time-consuming; 2) pressure to be an appropriate science representative; 3) outside the scope of their work; 4) could not perceive any benefit; and 5) apprehension about dialogue with the public. Among these factors, apprehension about dialogue may be the clearest reflection of the scientists’ underlying feelings about this form of communication and an indicator of more intrinsic barriers to engaging in science cafes.

This article examines communicative aspects of climate change, identifying and analysing metaphors used in specialized media reports on climate change, and discussing the aspects of climate change these metaphors emphasize and neglect. Through a critical discourse analysis of the two largest Swedish farm magazines over the 2000–2009 period, this study finds that greenhouse, war, and game metaphors were the most frequently used metaphors in the material. The analysis indicates that greenhouse metaphors are used to ascribe certain natural science characteristics to climate change, game metaphors to address positive impacts of climate change, and war metaphors to highlight negative impacts of climate change. The paper concludes by discussing the contrasting and complementary metaphorical representations farm magazines use to conventionalize climate change.

Easy, cheap, efficient as online service often are. Direct to Consumer Genetic Testing (DCGT) represents a big evolution towards personalised medicine. If the phenomenon seems to be unstoppable, the first aim of its present and future developments should be the customers’ benefits. A certified quality of the services provided, a clear communication and a well-structured support to customers should be the critical conditions that could transform those online services in something really important: for the individual’s health and the society as a whole.

Since the early 2000s, anybody can buy genetic tests, directly sold on the Internet. These tests provide information about susceptibilities to some diseases and/or about ancestry. Thus, this article deals with a new e-market, whose scientific basis (validity of the tests) and status (as medical devices or consumer goods) are currently controversial. On one hand, we describe the tests and the advertisement and marketing strategies used by the companies (we made an inventory of about 40); on the other hand, we discuss several aspects on the basis of interviews conducted with users: first, the entanglement of these strategies with the global context of healthism and the emphasis put on individuals’ empowerment regarding health decisions — “individualized biopolitics”. In addition, this article broaches the new kind of biosocial networks appearing in these tests’ wake: some users indeed gather on the basis of a genetic proximity, as is it put forward by their results.

Personal Genomics Companies are an emerging form of biotechnology startup that bring rapidly advancing whole genome technologies to a variety of commercial venues. With a combination of direct-to-consumer marketing, social media, and Web 2.0 applications these companies seek to create novel uses, including entertainment, for what is described as predictive medicine – that is the use of genetic marketers to create health forecasts that would allow individual’s healthcare to be tailored to their individual genomic data. In this brief piece, the authors use a critical cultural approach to question how this combination of genomics research, marketing, and communications technologies may alter both patient experiences and research processes. In it we argue these companies radically expand the definition of a patient by claiming all consumers are simply pre-symptomatic patients. Moreover, by placing genomic data on both the marketplace and cyberspace, personal genomic companies seek to create new avenues of research that alter how we define (and access) research agendas and human subjects. Therefore, beyond commonly discussed issues of ethics and privacy rights, Personal Genomics has the potential to alter both healthcare priorities and distribution.