Despite the fact that university research impacts every aspect of our lives, when the general public wants to understand topics such as AI, climate technologies and health, they often turn to the media for information, rather than universities or research institutes.
It is well past time to challenge that status quo.
Ironically, while the STEM sector is highly disruptive in research discoveries and quick to incorporate the latest in knowledge and technology into research, the approach to communications hasn’t really shifted since the 1990s – before the internet.
By focusing solely on media relations and promotional material, rather than creating content that appeals to the public, universities have contributed to an imbalance in public understanding of science. The media can present a story in any manner they choose, which can sometimes be biased towards their own agenda or interests. This also means important scientific advancements can be under-reported or distorted by the media for entertainment purposes.
The media’s approach to reporting has diminished people’s trust in their content.
According to the Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2022, only a small minority believe most news organisations put society’s interests ahead of their own, and 54% of those surveyed worry about distinguishing real from fake news.
In contrast, trust in science remains high.
The 2022 3M State of Science Index Survey found 85% of people trust scientists and engineers as sources of information, whereas only 61% of people trust what was reported in the media.
I am not against the media. I acknowledge there are many reputable publications with great science content. However, the overall science and technology coverage in the media is inadequate. It does not align with the public’s interest or need for high quality science reporting in our society. The media landscape is overflowing with political journalists and columnists and lacks science journalists and editors.
The general public has to rely on the media for science and technology news because the university sector as a whole has opted out of investing in creating engaging content around science.
And it’s not about dollars. Reaching global audiences takes a fraction of what it cost two decades ago. Many universities invest heavily in communication, but the impact of these investments is diminished by treating communication as a series of individual roles rather than a strategic effort with a well-designed content strategy.
What’s very clear is that innovation in science communication is happening at an individual level, but it could and should be happening at an institutional level.
Consider these two examples. In 2011 Derek Muller created the educational science channel Veritasium on YouTube. Total views of his videos are now close to 2 billion. Or look at ScienceAlert which engages more than 11 million readers per month with a staff of less than 10. For more examples, head over to my science communication publication – www.thebrilliant.com.au
In that gap between trust in media and trust in science, lies the opportunity for universities to become a trusted source of information by creating newsworthy and engaging science and technology content. It needs to learn how to become master storytellers like the media.
Today’s university sector’s blind spot around creating audience-focused content could be transformed into one of the sector’s greatest strengths.
Imagine if you were globally trusted as a source of information about your area of research expertise. What would this mean for your funding, influence, and philanthropy?
Opinion by Kylie Ahern, Publisher of The Brilliant and CEO of STEM Matters
Comments are closed.