The objective of this article is to present a panorama of the way in which journalistic coverage of science and technological themes is being carried out in Latin America, having as a case study seven newspapers of significant impact in the region. We analyzed all stories published by the science section during all the month of April 2004, in the following newspapers: La Nación, Argentina; El Mercurio, Chile; Mural, Mexico; El Comercio, Ecuador; O Globo, Folha de S. Paulo and Jornal do Commercio/Pernambuco, Brazil. A total of 482 texts were collected. The methodology joins quantitative and qualitative analysis. There are very few studies on science journalism in Latin America and even fewer that seek to explore a comparison among countries. We believe that studies such as ours can provide subsidies to stimulate the improvement of journalistic coverage of scientific and technological issues.

The historian Marshall Berman wrote that living in modern times means "to find ourselves in an environment that promises us adventure, power, joy, growth, transformation [...] and, at the same time, that threatens to destroy everything we have, everything we know".

If we wish to attempt an initial analysis of the inquiry on the communication of science in Brazil, India and China that JCOM proposed in its three most recent issues, we should paraphrase Chinese science and science-fiction writer, Yan Wu: even though these three countries are emerging in the fields of economy and science, and are now part of a wide group of communicators, promoting numerous methods to divulge information, they don't yet have a sound theory on the communication of science to the public. This is not an insignificant problem because according to David Dickson, the director of SciDev.Net, democratic dialogue on scientific matters is crucial to modern societies. However, it is difficult to propose the highest possible level of democratic dialogue on science topics without having a sound theory about the communication of science. In addition, the difficulties increase in those countries where developing economies and systems of science are both new and impetuous, as is the case of Brazil, India and China.

I have been involved in College education since my days as a student in the Universidad de Buenos Aires. At that time, 1960, I helped to teach the course of Scientific Russian given in the Faculty of Sciences; strange as it might seem, the aim of the course was to allow the students to use scientific books especially in the area of Physics and Mathematics.

Florence's La Specola Museum stirs up strong emotions. Among its collections, the valuable anatomical wax models created between the end of 17th and the beginning of 18th century stand out owing to their marvellous and provocative nature. The aim of this essay is to analyse the communication models epitomised by some of these works by means of historical semiotics, to nourish the widespread, but often underestimated assumption that science and the means used to spread it have always been influenced by intellectual suppositions and constantly interact with contemporary culture.

How does knowledge sharing affect scientists' everyday work in developing countries? And how important is it for the development not only of new scientific research, but also for improving the living conditions of local inhabitants? These are the questions that a group of scientists met to discuss during an international workshop on Knowledge Sharing for Local Development in the South held in Trieste, Italy (4-6 July 2005). Based on their personal experiences, their thoughts and opinions create an interesting insight into new practices for the public communication of science, medicine and technology from a point of view that is often under-estimated: the one of the scientists themselves. The workshop, organized by the Third World Network of Scientific Organizations (TWNSO) and the United Nations Development Programme's Special Unit for South-South Cooperation (UNDP-SSC), showcased 15 case studies that utilized a variety of knowledge sharing methods, and, in doing so, highlighted the critical role that knowledge sharing plays in sustainable development. For more information: http://www.twnso.org

As recognized by United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan, the human community has reached a point in which it is faced with an array of choices that will determine the quality of our lives and the state of the global environment for present and future generations. One possibility is that at long last we will pave a path toward environmental stewardship and sustainable development. But it is also quite possible that we will travel a less enlightened course, running down the earth's natural capital and severely limiting the choices our descendants will face.

A wide gap exists between what scientists and rural farmers know. The rapid advancements in digital technology are likely to widen this gap even further. At the farmers' level, this knowledge gap often translates into poor and inefficient management of resources resulting in reduced profits and environmental pollution. Most modern rice cultivars can easily yield more than 5 tons per hectare when well managed, but millions of farmers often get less than 5 tons using the same production inputs.

While knowledge-society is developing all around the world, science seems to be loosing its historical prestige in public perception, scientific vocations are declining among young people, "limit" on science is common subject of daily politics, research freedom is questioned in front of public good, scientists are dragged in front of public opinion. As a consequence, scientists are to be skilled in science communication. But communicating science is no more matter of "translating" scholar knowledge into lay language (popularization); it is mainly matter of crossing barriers of fundamental attitudes, understanding daily-life ends, sharing future scenarios and cultural values, becoming responsible for the societal dimension of science. Moreover, while confronting the coming Big Convergence (among nanosciences, bio-medical sciences, information and communication-sciences, neuro-cognitive sciences), science itself is called to cross barriers among disciplines, distinctions between pure and applied science, academic and industrial research, science and technology, etc. However, such crossovers are challenging for present education of scientists. The governance of the democratic knowledge-society not only demands more scientific education among citizens, but also a general revision of highest scientific curricula. What are the goals for educating scientists to public responsibility and participation? What are conceivable ways for joining the "two cultures" and integrating curricula? What cross-fertilizations are conceivable between natural and social sciences, scientific and humanistic education, specialised and more general formation?