Dialogue and debate: the new challenges of Science Communication

1. Dialogue and debate: the new challenges of Science Communication Steve Miller University College London Mid-1990s

2. Deficit Model Top down One way Paternalistic

3. BSE and GM How neutral and/or trustworthy is science? Sheila Jasanoff: “Civic dislocation” Trust in the government vanished, and people looked elsewhere for information and advice. In the UK, public confidence … rests on the reliability of persons … in the USA …trust rests in formal processes Gregory and Miller: The public are not quick to think the worst of scientists …the key is trust … established through the negotiation of a mutual understanding

4. Ulrich Beck Risk Society:Towards a New Modernity (1986) From wealth distribution to risk distribution The new paradigm: How can the risks and hazards systematically produced be prevented, minimised, dramatised or channelled “If the public only know what technical people know, they would be put at ease” - wrong. Even in their highly mathematical or technical garb, statements on risk contain statements of the type that is how we want to live … … in their concern with risk, the natural sciences have disempowered themselves somewhat, forced themselves towards democracy.

5. 2000 - the impact of “scandals” - a “crisis of trust” …the new mood for dialogue

6. The mood changes across Europe At the dawn of the 21st Century … our society is faced with the challenge of finding its proper place in a world shaken by economic and political turbulence. … science, technology and innovation are indispensable to meet this challenge. However, there are indications that the immense potential … is out of step with European citizens … Science activities need to centre around the needs and aspirations of Europe’s citizens to a greater extent than at present. 38 actions involving scientists, governments and the media

7. Different approaches • PUS • PUSH • Culture Scientifique

8. POST Open Channels

9. Dialogue and debate - five questions Dia-logue v. mono-aud - who’s talking and who’s listening? Policy orientation - who’s allowed in? The role of the media - media values v. policy expectations Consensus v. balanced opposition Communication - who’s trained for what?

10. Dia-logue v. Mono-aud • Is Dialogue the new Deficit Model - better persuasion • Is Dialogue the new Deficit Model - the Dialogue “Experts” • Is Dialogue the new Deficit Model - the “wrong” answer • Is Dialogue the new Deficit Model - who responds to what

11. Who’s allowed in? Perugia Science Festival 1985: Scientist must “consider it their duty” to communicate NOW: • Policy advice - elite to elite • Public consultation - representative citizens • Public outcome - “confident consumers”

12. The role of the media Much emphasis put on role of the media - BUT • Media have their own agenda • Media have their own values • Media have their own practices • Media “like” bad news • Media like conflict

13. Consensus v. balanced opposition Consensus conference model - homogenous public? • Tradition - issues are explored • Tradition - facts are contested • Tradition - interests are different Outcome - winners and losers

14. Communication training www.ensconet.org Modules for Science Communication Training • Writing for and talking to the media, plus media culture • Presenting for policy makers and science centres • Talking and listening • Communicating risk and controversy Training enhances confidence … … but does it make better communicators?

15. Dialogue and Debate: the new challenges of Science Communication Steve Miller University College London s.miller@ucl.ac.uk