Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Wednesday January 18 2017, @03:02PM   Printer-friendly
from the they-should-swear-more dept.

Anita Makri argues that the form of science communicated in popular media leaves the public vulnerable to false certainty.

What is truth? How do we find it and does it still carry weight in public debate? Given recent political events, these are important and urgent questions. But of the two industries I work in that are concerned with truth — science and journalism — only the latter has seriously engaged and looked for answers. Scientists need to catch up, or they risk further marginalization in a society that is increasingly weighing evidence and making decisions without them.

[...] What's overlooked by many is how science is losing its relevance as a source of truth. To reclaim this relevance, scientists, communicators, institutions and funders must work to change the way that socially relevant science is presented to the public. This is not about better media training for researchers. It demands a rethink about the kind of science that we want to communicate to broader society. This message may sound familiar but the new focus on post-truth shows there is now a tangible danger that must be addressed.

[...] If the public is better equipped to navigate this science, it would restore trust and improve understanding of different verdicts, and perhaps help people to see through some of the fake news that circulates on scientific matters.

http://www.nature.com/news/give-the-public-the-tools-to-trust-scientists-1.21307

What do you think, will the general public trust these tools, if available ?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Troll) by jmorris on Wednesday January 18 2017, @04:58PM

    by jmorris (4844) on Wednesday January 18 2017, @04:58PM (#455507)

    I love this article. The denial is so strong I really could have stopped with the Solyent summary or the first paragraph of the article but I read the whole thing because the #salty was so tasty. It probably won't be as much fun when you Progs make it from denial to anger, at least not unless you can focus that anger inward on your utter failure and just kill yourselves. Please! Do it!

    This article had it all though, it was obviously the right blog post to elevate to Nature as the encapsulation of the Narrative to ensure all Progs are synced to the Current Truth.

    The laugh out lines:

    But of the two industries I work in that are concerned with truth — science and journalism — only the latter has seriously engaged and looked for answers.

    That one took a bit to recover from, but I had to soldier on and risk overdosing. We begin with an abiding belief in the supernatural, that Journalism exists... somewhere and that it gives half a f*ck about Truth. Please. We all lived through 2016, if there is anyone who still believes that they are brain damaged or just woke up from a coma... which means they WERE brain damaged. The mainstream media (Nature included) all appear in the DNC org chart, the others have differing agendas. If you want Truth try the philosophy dept at one of the few remaining old school liberal arts universities.

    scientists seem to see themselves as victims of, rather than active players in, the new political scene.

    Translation from the NewSpeak: Their side lost. Meaning they are politicians first, and VERY active in the OLD political scene. Anyone with enough brains to be a scientist has a political opinion, most have poorly thought out ones though. But it doesn't matter unless you were mixing your politics and science, which almost all do now. They were trying to transfer the imprimatur of Science to the politcal agenda of The Party. They failed and now both their political party AND science suffer from their failure. Example is the very next sentence of the article which gets to the Progs's woobie, AGW, and the fears of the recent loss on that project.

    Next we get plenty of reassurance that the only problem is communication failure. The Faithful must never question the Holy Writ of Science, for it is always and forever Settled. Unless it Changes, then all must instantly change and memory hole any evidence there was a different Truth. Science certainly never changes because The Party loses an election! So fear not troops, you did nothing wrong, you only need additional funding for training in how to better communicate.

    People expect science to offer authoritative conclusions that correspond to the deterministic model. When there's incomplete information, imperfect knowledge or changing advice — all part and parcel of science — its authority seems to be undermined.

    Translation: In keeping with the cornerstone of The Party, all Science is Equal. If a Science is not equal we shall engage in Affirmative Action to make it Equal and it shall be forbidden to admit that we are elevating the less complete conclusions to the status of Truth. All must be Equal, all must serve the needs of The Party. This is important because many of the most "socially relevant science" policy recommendations of Science / The Party come from these less developed fields.

    Here we see the heart of the failure in mixing Science and Politics. Science can, with great difficulty and on a very intermittent schedule, tell us what the Universe -IS-. With our current level of understanding though, Science is ill equipped to speak to the policy implications, to be "socially relevant."

    Finally she gets to the meat of her proposal. To restore public confidence in the infallibility of Science... wait for it... we must have closer collusion between Big Science, Big Education and Big Media sweetened with some Big Funding from somewhere unspecified because I suspect Big Government won't be playing along for the next couple of years. In other words, "Once more, with feeling!"

    Guys! You tried controlling all the levers of information and achieved great (unholy but great) things. But you lost the monopoly. And with it you lost the ability to declare anything to be The Truth, you can't declare up is down, that black is white anymore. It is gone. It ain't coming back. New plan time. But better to admit your tired faith is as dead as Soviet Communism, chug a quart of vodka for courage and KILL YOURSELF!

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   0  
       Troll=2, Insightful=1, Interesting=1, Total=4
    Extra 'Troll' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 18 2017, @05:15PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 18 2017, @05:15PM (#455521)

    When you start out from a "rock solid" foundation it is easy to see the bias. Jmo you started off with the preconception of liberal ivory tower elitism and thus read into everything like a true conspiracy nut. You don't care about what the author is trying to say, only how it fits into the pieces of your pet theory. The problem is that you and your fellow crazies actively destroy attempts at communicating science. For all the talk about agendas and echo chambers you sure do a good job at trying to derail anything that doesn't fit your worldview. I almost never see rational debate from your posts, just rambling about the evils of progressives.

    Trump winning sure lifted the veil on the divide which has been lurking for a long time. I'll just sit back and watch you crazies do mental backflips to try and justify the next 4 years of Big Cock being repeatedly shoved up your ass.