In order to be able to communicate scientific findings and events, such as the FHJ Arctic Expedition is going to be, it is necessary to explore the topic and principles of science communication. This blog post will give an introduction over the topic, explain its relevance, and define the term itself.
Introduction
Scientific knowledge and information are the foundation of the modern knowledge and media society, with scienctific knowledge increasingly spreading within our society and shaping the actions of both individuals and political, economic, and other institutions.
A lot of this knowledge is being spread via the media, be it „classic“ mass media such as newspapers, papers, radio, TV, or, with the rise of online media, increasingly social media and other digital platforms. These channels are important for many people and are often the sole sources of information which contribute to their knowledge of scientific topics. Therefore, it is also important in what way scientific results, organizations and contributors in their respective fields are being presented and communicated to the public, how their reputation and believability can be ensured and what effects they have on their audiences. ( https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-658-12898-2_1 , S.3)
While it is harder these days to separate public communication about scientific topics (such as journalistic or educative contents from museums or fictional/entertainment formats like films or comics) from non- or semi-public science communication, where scientific knowledge is created, tried and circulated (within science conferences or scientific publications), causing the boundaries between the scientific and societal public to blur, the significance of science communication is undeniable, shaping the understanding and the image people have of science. (Ibid S.4)
The Relevance of Science Communication
Humans have to make an abundance of decisions throughout their entire lifespan. These decisions often include science-related topics – parents have to decide whether or not they want to vaccinate their child, people suffering from an illness have to decide whether or not they are willing to risk certain treatment methods or operations, companies have to decide what investments they are willing to make, and political decision makers have to contemplate whether nuclear power is worth the risk, just to name a few examples. For each of these question there is a variety of (and sometimes very controversial) answers, that can be considered. Also, there is scientific knowledge available that can be used in these considerations. (https://books.google.at/books?hl=de&lr=&id=yGZ4DwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP3&dq=wissenschaftskommunikation&ots=cSROIHTbdL&sig=avDg8h2jssbOfunrRWv95PYuW0M#v=onepage&q=wissenschaftskommunikation&f=false S.11) While scientific results may not always prove to be correct and must always be seen as some sort of work in progress even when something is „proven“ (due to some probability of failure/wrongness), science produces the best kind of knowledge that individuals, societies and institutions can use as the foundation for making decisions. Scientific knowledge has one deciding factor in its favor: the systematic, methodological approach of creating and gaining knowledge.
Defining science communication
As scientific knowledge is produced, the way it is being communicated is of great importance – and this leads us to the field of science communication. The exact definition is not always clear, as interpretations of it differ. The following definition by Schäfer et. Al. from 2015 tries to capture the term with all its facets, defining it as follows:
Science communication includes all forms of communication that are focused on scientific knowledge or scientific work, both within and outside of the institutionalized science, including their production, content, usage and effects. This definition includes therefore also science journalism, knowledge-based mass-communication and relevant PR, but also exceeds these. For one, science communication can happen within and between social groups. Also, the media communication of such topics can differ: we can differentiate between science-internal communication, which is mainly targeted at experts („scholarly communication“) and science-external communication targets outer-science audiences such as the broad public or also more specified groups of people (such as deciders in politics or economy). Both forms of science communication can happen on different levels of publicity, ranging from topic-centered public spaces such as conferences, museums, science slams or conferences to the usage of mass-media such as newspapers, online-forums or TV-shows for science communication.
Many forms of science communication have become increasingly important. Science-internal communication has seen significant growth corresponding to the rise of sciences themselves. Also science-external, public communication has increased over the years. (Ibid. 12-14)
