In 1989 when I started graduate school, the importance of public communication was far from my mind. As a young scientist, I, like many others, was overwhelmed simply trying to acquire knowledge in my field, learn how to create knowledge as a researcher, and communicate it to my peers.
In 1989 also received my first e-mail account. "Cloud computing" involved logging into a Cray Y-MP at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, a "supercomputer" that at the time was lightning fast, but provided about as many computations per second as today's smart phones. There was no Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram. The newspaper was still a thing. There was no Fox News. That bears repeating. There was no Fox News. The Immigration Act of 1990, which resulted in more immigrants being admitted to the U.S. in the 1990s than any single prior decade, passed with bipartisan support in the Senate 89-9 and in the house 264-118.
It was a different time.
Amongst the areas I received little to no training for in graduate school was public communication. I never took a formal class in this area. At the time, public communication usually meant doing interviews with a science reporter or specialist from a newspaper, TV station, or radio station. My advisor spent a great deal of time doing these interviews, so I did gain one important lesson and that was the importance of communicating to the public.
Fast forward to today and you find a massively transformed media environment, a highly polarized electorate and congress, and an invisible virus that poses the greatest challenge to our country since World War II. We are fighting a war not only against a virus, but also against misinformation and anti-intellectualism.
Some words of advice for the young scientists out there. I don't know how to win this war, but retreating and leaving a vacuum definitely seems like a losing strategy. We need you and in the future, society will need you even more. First, seek opportunities to learn as much as you can about science communication, interacting with the public, and communicating with congress, politicians, and leaders in fields outside of science. Second, remember that science is an endeavor in which truth and honesty are critical for success. Commit yourself to accuracy. Think "what would Mr. Spock do." Third, be cognizant of the limits of your expertise and that of your discipline. Knowledge of what you don't know is often more valuable than knowledge of what you do know. Finally, learn how to avoid getting into a mud-wrestling match with a snake. There are "political animals" out there who are ruthless and will do all they can to discredit you or your profession. Do not fear these ruffians, but prepare for dealing them.
Do these things and when you sit in the hot seat, remember that the scientific community is there with you.
I don't think Fox News or non-leftists are the only "ruffians", honestly. And I seriously doubt the Democratic politicians have a monopoly on science-based political decisions. CNN seems to exist lately to attack anyone who does not necessarily believe that the only answer is a continued economic lockdown. They even attacked Colorado governor Polis (D) last night for his data-driven, measured re-opening of the local economy. I wonder how CNN would behave if there were a Democratic president up for re-election in this year of COVID-19.
ReplyDeleteMy comment about mud-wrestling with a snake was non-partisan and applies to both major parties. I have had difficult exchanges with both republicans and democrats and have found it easier to keep all politicians at arms length regardless of political persuasion.
DeleteFox News is singled out above as I was trying to emphasize how things have changed in the past couple of decades and they have been the most disruptive force. Bias and innaccuracies exist in all news, but they have traditionally been more "opinion" driven, although CNN has trended that way in recent years.
I should add I mainly agree with the post regarding science communication, and am entirely in agreement with global warming consensus science, and that there does exist a strong element of anti-intellectualism on that subject which has mostly found political expression in the Republican Party. I do think science communication needs to be mostly left to the more experienced, older scientists.
ReplyDeleteMy comments above, admittedly not worded as carefully as perhaps they could have, were to encourage young scientists to acquire the skills to be effective public communicators. They were based on my experiences.
DeleteThere is certainly something to be said for experience, but my perspective is that we need the broadest, most diverse group of scientists possible doing outreach and that includes age diversity.
Young scientists should indeed focus intensely on the science itself, and honest discovery of scientific truth. Once you get into science communication, you are getting into the field of public relations, very political.
ReplyDeleteIt is indeed unfortunate that the US has two hardened opinions, based on the binary Democrat-Republican divide. Everything has to be politicized now, no unity.
ReplyDeleteI can see it now, your political calulations on responding to my posts. That isn't science.
ReplyDeleteI love your blog, but you just might be getting too political now.
ReplyDeleteIts great you speak your mind and you still have a forum to do so.
ReplyDeleteYour post today clearly identifies you as a partisan political operative, sorry to say.
ReplyDeleteMy words were also not as careful as they should have been. I don't really think you are a "political operative". I would modify my post to say young scientists should practice science communication by giving talks and presentations. They don't need to politicize them though.
ReplyDeleteNo worries. The comments from you and the others are appreciated and valued. As someone once said, "there is no such thing as good writing, only good rewriting." This is a post that deserved greater thought, reflection, and rewriting.
DeleteThank you for writing this blog and for the thoughtful responses to comments. All helpful.
ReplyDelete-young scientist