Communicating Science Broadly: Science Communciation Symposium

Today I attended the Public Engagement and Science Communication Symposium, specifically the keynote address by senior communications strategist, Jeff Nesbit. His lecture addressed a lot of the topics that we've covered in class, focusing on a number of real world examples.

Nesbit talked a lot about what he called the "changing media landscape." As stated in the panel discussion earlier, science communication is no longer a upstream-downstream, two-dimensional process (Hilgartner anyone?). Newer mediums and bigger audiences require scientists and organizations to do more than just tell the public what's going on; people really need to understand. We can all attest to that suggestion, as Professor Lewenstein's Web of Science Communication exemplifies the complexities that new times and new technologies produce.

What I found most inspiring was his belief in taking risks. The National Science Foundation, of which he is associated, is unique in its pursuance of new, creative ways to communicate science. I feel that he's entirely right and that just about everything we've learned in class can back him up on this belief. Over time, the need for communication has expanded, from merely sharing ideas and experiments in order to expand the body of knowledge, to publishing in pursuit of funding and support, to ultimately interesting and involving the public in science.

We can see it in the diversity of mediums that have evolved in science communication. Science museums, in all their glory, can sometimes be intimidating with rows and rows and rows of specimens and the iconic exhibits guarded behind velvet ropes. Science centers have evolved to incorporate the public in science and learning, dropping the ropes for fully interactive and "touchable" exhibits. In recent years, citizen science has evolved, from attracting data-collectors to educating and really involving the public. It's even grown in size, from the Sapsucker Woods Ornithology Lab to the online, fully accessible database.

Without risk taking, I highly doubt that any of these advances could have been accomplished. Expanding the world of science communication demands creativity and with it, a little courage. Nesbit mentioned many of the projects that the NSF has done in recent years, partnering with various publications and organizations to connect the media with science.

One that impressed me most, involved them literally connecting The Today Show with scientists working in Antarctica. When NBC realized how great the idea was, they devoted a segment every day for a week, showing the public what scientists were doing, the implications, etc. The NSF has done a lot of work with network news stations, relaying background footage and satellite video phone connections with scientists for stories.

While Nesbit talked about these and many other examples, drawing from many of the topics we discussed in class, I couldn't help but think of the big picture. It seemed to me that the work of Nesbit and the NSF is what's needed to keep "The Web" interconnected. They sew together the mediums, the people, and the information that's necessary for building the body of knowledge we call science. They merge the television programs and the studies, the fans and the scientists, and the world of science with the rest of the globe.

Listening to this lecture, with the background that I gained from this class, has opened my eyes not only to the importance of science communication, but to the myriad of modern advances being made all around us. The realm of science communication is indefinitely expanding and I'm keeping my eyes out for newer, riskier, better ways to connect the public with the science.