Science news today! Food, media, and controversy

Transcription

1 Science news today! Food, media, and controversy Bruce Lewenstein Dept. of Science & Technology Studies and Dept. of Communication Cornell University Cornell Food Systems Global Summit, Ithaca, NY USA Copyright 2014 by Bruce V. Lewenstein 1

2 Copyright 2014 by Bruce V. Lewenstein 2

3 The science news questions Why is media coverage like this? What is the effect? How can we have an informed discussion? Copyright 2014 by Bruce V. Lewenstein 3

4 Why is media coverage like this? Key values: Conflict, event-oriented, human interest Lack of science training in most media personnel Yes, there are specialized science reporters. But they don t cover most science-linked stories. Fragmentation of media environment State of the media Copyright 2014 by Bruce V. Lewenstein 4

5 What is in the media? Recurring themes: Technological progress (>80%) Economic impact (>10%) Ethics, Pandora s box, public accountability, globalism, etc. Google: self-reinforcing system? Nanotech results: more environment & health than business & economics Schwartzman 2014; Ladwig et al GMO coverage Nucci & Kubey 2007; Nucci et al. 2009; NSB 2014 Copyright 2014 by Bruce V. Lewenstein 5

6 What is effect? 25%, crop gene modification very or extremely dangerous 21%, GE foods are safe (similar to other surveys through 2000s) 35% would eat GM fish, 38% would eat GM meat, 60% would eat GM veggies 93% said food should be labeled No other country more positive (Based on US polling, ca. 2010) NSB, S&EI 2014, p Mcknight 2006 [n.b., scale is 5 point Likert scale] Copyright 2014 by Bruce V. Lewenstein 6

7 Gaskell et al. 2006, p. 17 What is the effect? Trust How to achieve? Lack of politics Warmth Social networks NOT: Accuracy More information Copyright 2014 by Bruce V. Lewenstein 7

8 What can we do about it? Public engagement Why dialogue matters Getting values on the table Institutional trust Perceived fairness Copyright 2014 by Bruce V. Lewenstein 8

9 Solution? Food advocacy? Or: food discussion? Copyright 2014 by Bruce V. Lewenstein 9

10 To conclude: Context: Communication is a rapidly changing field Effect: Situation is mixed: support, but nuanced Goal: Discussion, not delivery References Gaskell, George, Stares, Sally, Allansdottir, Agnes, Allum, Nick, Corchero, Cristina, Fischler, Claude,... Wagner, Wolfgang. (2006). Europeans and Biotechnology in 2005: Patterns and Trends. Final report on Eurobarometer A report to the European Commission's Directorate- General for Research (pp. 87). London: London School of Economics. Ladwig, Peter, Anderson, Ashley A., Brossard, Dominique, Scheufele, Dietram A., & Shaw, Bret. (2010). Narrowing the nano discourse? Materials Today, 13(5), Mcknight, Andrew J. (2006). Does Application Matter? An Examination of Public Perception of Agricultural Biotechnology Applications. AgBioForum, 9(2), online only; article 7. National Science Board. (2014). Science & Engineering Indicators Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. Nucci, Mary L., Cuite, Cara L., & Hallman, William K. (2009). When Good Food Goes Bad: Television Network News and the Spinach Recall of Science Communication, 31(2), doi: / Nucci, Mary L., & Kubey, Robert. (2007). "We Begin Tonight With Fruits and Vegetables": Genetically Modified Food on the Evening News Science Communication, 29(2), doi: / Schwartzman, Roy. (2014). Media coverage of genetically modified foods and animals. In Teresa L. Thompson (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Health Communication (pp ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Copyright 2014 by Bruce V. Lewenstein 10