I do not use the term "public understanding". It carries all of the
baggage that we see stacked up around us here.
My preference is for Public Engagement with Science and Technology
(PEST). I stole the acronym from Laurence Smaje. It removes the nanny
elements that some people seem reluctant to discard.
MK
=======================================================
Michael Kenward
Science, Technology, Business Writer
www.michael.kenward.dial.pipex.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: psci-com: on the public understanding of science
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ben Johnson
> Sent: 16 November 2001 11:27
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Junk science (was RE: Science and Technology)
>
>
> more and more of this tennis match seems to depend on
> "public understanding of science". I wonder if the players
> could give us their own definitions of that term, in order
> that we might put their comments into some wider context?
>
>
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2001 11:03:20 +0000 Clyde Francks
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > > >
> > > > Am I really having to argue the case for more well researched
> > > > journalism on an email list dedicated to the public
> understanding
> > > > of science?
> > > >
> > > -----End Quoted (and cut) Message-----
> > >
> > > Where did I say anything about science journalism not being well
> > > researched? It is usually better researched many than
> other forms of
> > > journalism. It is just that you do not like the result and would
> > > rather it ignored the bits that get stuck on the soles of your
> > > shoes.
> > >
> > > Do not draw massive generalisations from messages that
> address only
> > > some aspects of a phenomenon. This started when someone raised a
> > > piece of strange pseudo medicine. Had it begun with
> something on the
> > > more didactic bits of science in the media, then you would have
> > > heard a different message from me.
> > >
> > > Just as science comes in all shapes and sizes, so does science
> > > journalism. When I ruled over an empire that delivered
> the world's
> > > premier weekly fix of science, we maintained a deliberate
> balancing
> > > act of "straight" science and more provocative stuff.
> Fortunately,
> > > there were readers out there, maybe still are, who can
> handle both
> > > without becoming hopelessly confused.
> > >
> > > MK
> >
> > Apologies. I was responding to your candid email describing your
> > profession, which involved not giving a hoot about scientific
> > credibility.
> >
> > My point is straightforward. Since scientists have their
> own agenda,
> > its wise for anyone interested in promoting public
> understanding not
> > to quote unsubstantiated ideas or results without making that
> > qualification. Thats what leads to magnetic whatever it was, and
> > nightly on the TV those awful documentaries showing "radical" new
> > individual theories by self-promoting scientists,
> historians etc. If
> > space doesn't permit to cover the complexities properly,
> then best not
> > to do it at all. Those programs must spread enormous amounts of
> > confusion and leave people with simply the wrong
> information, with no
> > proper understanding of the way the world works.
> >
> > No matter how well you research and portray the opinion of an
> > individual scientist, that does not constitute a proper
> report worthy
> > of publicising. I understand that the media does not operate with
> > public understanding uppermost in mind. What's uppermost is getting
> > work and profit. However, this is a list dedicated to
> finding ways to
> > promote the public understanding of science. Can we not agree some
> > guiding principles for doing that, that take into account the
> > realities of science and press? Clyde
> >
> >
> **********************************************************************
> >
> > 1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example,
> > send an email to [log in to unmask] with the following message:
> >
> > set psci-com nomail
> >
> > 2. To resume email from the list, send the following message:
> >
> > set psci-com mail
> >
> > 3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with
> > the message:
> >
> > leave psci-com
> >
> >
> **********************************************************************
>
> ----------------------------------------
> Ben Johnson
> Graphic Science
> Faculty of Applied Sciences
> University of the West of England
> Coldharbour Lane
> Bristol
> BS16 1QY
>
> E-mail: [log in to unmask]
> Phone +44 (0)117 344 3756
> Mobile 07813 580 397
> http://www.uwe.ac.uk/fas/graphicscience/index.> html
>
>
>
> **********************************************************************
>
> 1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for
> example, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the
> following message:
>
> set psci-com nomail
>
> 2. To resume email from the list, send the following message:
>
> set psci-com mail
>
> 3. To leave psci-com, send an email to
> [log in to unmask] with the message:
>
> leave psci-com
>
> **********************************************************************
>
**********************************************************************
1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example,
send an email to [log in to unmask] with the following message:
set psci-com nomail
2. To resume email from the list, send the following message:
set psci-com mail
3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the message:
leave psci-com
**********************************************************************
|