For the past thirty years, The National Institute of Higher Education, Research, Science and Technology (NIHERST), Trinidad and Tobago, has been a pioneering force in science popularization both locally and regionally. The biennial NIHERST Sci-TechKnoFest is the Caribbean’s premier science festival, having hosted seven large-scale events catering to tens of thousands of patrons each. This article provides an overview of the role of NIHERST at the national development level, an in-depth look at the content of Sci-TechKnoFest 2013, its impacts on visitors and the way forward for the festival.

Creating science content for cultural contexts in which the audience are not primarily motivated by an interest in science, can provide exciting opportunities for experimenting with new approaches to science engagement. This article explores some of the learning gained, and practical methodologies developed by Einstein’s Garden, the science, nature and environment area of the Green Man Festival.

Over the past decades there has been an increasing recognition of the need to promote dialogue between science and society. Often this takes the form of formal processes, such as citizen’s juries, that are designed to allow the public to contribute their views on particular scientific research areas. But there are also many less formal mechanisms that promote a dialogue between science and society. This editorial considers science festivals and citizen science in this context and argues that we need a greater understanding of the potential impacts of these projects on the individuals involved, both scientists and the public.

This essay intends to present and reflect on the production and reception of sound language styles in a radio programme discussing science called Universidade das Criancas UFMG (UFMG Children’s University). This programme, aimed at children, is broadcast on the UFMG (Federal University of Minas Gerais) Educational Radio Station, located in Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.

The cultural phenomenon of ‘science festivals’ is ever expanding throughout the world, as universities, city and regional governments, and science engagement professionals alike embrace the concept of a focused ‘celebration’ of science. In the past however science festivals have been criticized for neglecting underrepresented audiences. This special issue explores the extent to which current science festivals have managed to engage with diverse publics, and identifies the key challenges facing the future of science festivals, most notably the need for deeper research into the impacts of science festivals.

Science festivals (or just “festivals”) are currently ascendant in the United States with more than 40 new initiatives emerging in just the past 5 years, but their story is not so easily told. The schedule of any one individual festival may contain a staggering array of events, and each festival is different both from year to year, and from other festivals. One multi-festival evaluation points to potential strengths of the format, as well as the importance of the participation of STEM practitioners. Collaboration and social identity formation are considered as powerful festival impacts, and potential challenges for festivals are discussed.

Thailand’s National Science Fair is an annual two-week event held to promote science, encourage learning and prove that science is for everyone. Derived from the first ‘Thai National Science Day’ in 1982, the fair now hosts over 1 million visitors, with exhibits from over 50 national and international companies and institutions from governmental, educational and commercial sectors. Whilst the fair is normally held in Bangkok the outreach program holds mini fairs for 32 Universities and numerous schools across the nation for local participation in science week. This paper discusses the past, present and future of the fair, incorporating existing evaluation findings and identified key challenges.

Public understanding of science has been replaced by engagement and participation, and science events, like festivals and science days, have become significant actors by offering direct contacts between scientists, public and policy-makers, as opportunities to engage and participate. After more than 20 years of festivals and events, the need for impact evidence is strong, although it is acknowledged that it will have to be based on complex data and observations. Many science events look for collaboration within the cultural sector. Social inclusion and participation in local and regional development are other important issues for the science events community.

In this book, Brian G. Southwell discusses how disparities in information-sharing arise and what can be done to alleviate them. In all sorts of ways and for all sorts of reasons, people have always sought to share information among their family and other social networks. However, this sharing has never been equal: inevitably, some people are better-informed than others and some are more socially-connected than others. At first glance, the plethora of communication tools and technologies available nowadays should help democratise information and reduce disparity but differences in how, when and with whom information is shared create conversation gaps and maintain inequalities. Southwell explores and catalogues information-sharing behaviours, discusses the factors that affect how and why we share information and addresses the questions of why disparities in information-sharing matter and what we can do about the gaps between ‘information-haves’ and ‘information have-nots’.

Scientists often cite discrepancy between scientific values and news values as a primary factor in poor quality science reporting. The goal of this study was to understand how news values including conflict and controversy affect science communicators’ evaluation of press releases containing quotes from outside expert sources. Results of an online survey experiment suggest science communicators find a climate science press release with an outside expert quote that introduces controversy to be more newsworthy. However, when a science communicator attributes relatively high importance to reliability of facts as a guiding principle in story selection, this preference for controversy is reversed.