In brief, Yes scientists should be treated as professionals and
therefore there should be regulatory mechanisms in place, both at an
institutional level and at a professional body level, via Codes of
Conduct and Ethics. The British Psychological Society has both Codes and
a complaints and disciplinary system that is open to anyone to make a
complaint.
However I am nervous when it is implied that scientists are, or even
should be, different from any other professional, by somehow not being
allowed to exploit the media to enhance their own position, which I
think is equivalent to 'own gain' - scientists are after all human
beings, and have the same highs and lows and failings as the rest of us
mere mortals.
I would also be nervous when potentially implying that you can't explain
some human behaviour in evolutionary terms, there is much good science
out there which would fundamentally disagree, but whether the public are
intrinsically interested in that as a scientific endeavour is moot.
Stephen White
-----Original Message-----
From: psci-com: on public engagement with science
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Newson, Lesley
Sent: 04 March 2009 15:59
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PSCI-COM] Shopping study?! Yes it is unethical
Stephen,
I agree with you about engaging the mass media. It should be
encouraged.
But think the problem here might be quite different. We need to think
about how we go about policing one of our own.
Should scientists be treated as professionals? If so, can anything be
done to make sure they behave in a professional manner? There are
procedures for sanctioning doctors who behave incompetently or
mendaciously and betray the trust placed in them even if no one is
actually hurt. There are also procedures for protecting doctors who
behave competently and honestly, even if they accidentally do harm.
Let us imagine that the culprit is the scientist who is behind the story
and not the journalists who wrote it. Assume that (for his or her own
gain) a scientist abused the public's interest in a scientific endeavour
(e.g. explaining human behaviour in evolutionary terms) and this
scientist exploited the media for his or her own gain.
This is unprofessional conduct, in my opinion - although it might be
difficult to prove or even argue, given the principle of academic
freedom. But are there any
procedures in place to deter such unprofessionalism?
Lesley
________________________________________
From: psci-com: on public engagement with science
[[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stephen White
[[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 04 March 2009 08:29
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PSCI-COM] Shopping study?! Yes it is unethical
I would like to wade in on the side of the angels and progress - in
other words to support Dianne and Tim. In the last 20 plus years of
outputting stories I have had excellent and accurate coverage from the
tabloids, whilst at the same time having some less than excellent
coverage from the so called quality end of the market.
I fail to understand why Mike, you should take such a snobbish attitude
- as you well know writing short is a much harder craft skill than
writing long, especially aimed at an audience with a generally lower
reading age.
I really hope that we are not returning to the dark ages of
no-engagement with the mass media, or selective engagement based on some
bizarre notion that the tabloids are second class citizens, but I don't
think we are...because the younger scientists that I come across, in the
training I do, understand perfectly well that using all the media gives
them extra leverage and profile - I think the anti-media dinosaurs are a
dying breed.
Cheers
Stephen White
Director of Communications
The British Psychological Society
From: psci-com: on public engagement with science
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Tim Reynolds
Sent: 04 March 2009 07:42
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PSCI-COM] Shopping study?! Yes it is unethical
Hmm - this thread is heading in a direction that makes me wonder what
(if any) progress we have made in science communication over the past
few decades if we are thinking that scientists should not engage with
mass audience media.
Sure PRs (some learned institutions and professional scienific bodies
included) often pull an occassional 'stunt' to get coverage that may
have a greater or lesser true scientific content but that is the nature
of the game I would say.
Clearly we (the subscribers to this list) have managed to determine that
the science in the reported story is a little dubious and that the
article might just be entertainment rather than "arse-kicking science"
and I am sure most readers - including tabloid readers - can manage ths
same analysis and haven't been traumatised by its content.
But if you do know people who have been affected by the story, please
send me their details as I have a load of nutritional supplements and
perpetual motion machines that I need to offload at discount prices!
A bientot
Tim Reynolds
Inta Communcation, Brussels
________________________________
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 22:33:47 +0000
From: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PSCI-COM] Shopping study?! Yes it is unethical
To: [log in to unmask]
Mike - I note that you posted this on Psci com - do you think ABSW
colleagues would have a different take on this? (you ask 'em - it's your
opinion)
There are two issues:
One - should scientists aid PR companies and similar in starting stories
from scratch with pre-determined surveys and call them "science" - which
doesn't seem to be a tabloid issue (gone - along with Roger - are the
days when the Telegraph (allegedly) banned "stunt science" releases
from certain organisations).
Two - if you have a genuine news story should you tell the tabloids? If
its a genuine story and it's covered elsewhere you've then just got a
load of pissed off tabloid hacks wanting to know why they aren't good
enough for you - and - if they've an editor breathing down their neck -
determined to come up with some sort of story anyhow.
Two - subpara one - as Mary rightly says - there are some stories you
actively want to solicit tabloid involvement with because they've got
the reader profile you need.
Given that it was the Telegraph who printed the story that started this
correspondence and that the Sunday Times view on the causes of AIDs was
for a long time scandalously misguided, I think you should be advising
them not to talk to journalists at all.
Is Sir Walter Bodmer out there somewhere? - I think we need a report....
Cheers - Dianne
Dianne Stilwell
Communications Consultant
88 Munster Road
Teddington
Middx TW11 9LW
+44 (0)20 8977 6520
+44 (0)7957 200214
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
On 3 Mar 2009, at 18:28, Michael Kenward wrote:
When I talk to scientists about working with the media, as I did last
Thursday at Sussex, I deter them from talking to the tabloids. They
arrive
with an agenda that cannot really accommodate "proper" or even improper
science.
MK
________________________________
Windows Live Hotmail just got better. Find out
more!<http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/134665311/direct/01/>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
Scanned for viruses and unwanted content by emailsystems
If you believe this email is spam, please forward via email to
[log in to unmask]
Information regarding this service can be found at
www.emailsystems.com
**********************************************************************
1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example, send
an email to mailto:[log in to unmask] with the following message:
set psci-com nomail -- [include hyphens]
2. To resume email from the list, send an email to
[log in to unmask] with the message:
set psci-com mail -- [include hyphens]
3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the
message:
leave psci-com -- [include hyphens]
4. Further information about the psci-com discussion list, including
list archive, can be found at the list web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html
5. The psci-com gateway to internet resources on science communication
and science and society can be found at http://psci-com.ac.uk
6. To contact the Psci-com list owner, please send an email to
mailto:[log in to unmask]
**********************************************************************
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
The British Psychological Society
This email is intended for the addressee only. It may contain
confidential information: disclosure of or action in reliance upon this
information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us by return email
and delete the message.
Any views are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those
of the Society, which accepts no liability for the consequences of any
actions taken on the basis of this information unless confirmed in
writing by a Society Manager.
We accept no liability for any loss or damage caused by viruses: you are
advised to conduct your own checks on any attachments. When emailing us,
be aware that email is not a 100 percent secure medium
The British Psychological Society is a charity registered in England and
Wales, Registration Number : 229642 and a charity registered in
Scotland, Registration Number : SC039452 - VAT Registration Number : 240
3937 76
www.bps.org.uk
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
**********************************************************************
1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example, send
an email to mailto:[log in to unmask] with the following message:
set psci-com nomail -- [include hyphens]
2. To resume email from the list, send an email to
[log in to unmask] with the message:
set psci-com mail -- [include hyphens]
3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the
message:
leave psci-com -- [include hyphens]
4. Further information about the psci-com discussion list, including
list archive, can be found at the list web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html
5. The psci-com gateway to internet resources on science communication
and science and society can be found at http://psci-com.ac.uk
6. To contact the Psci-com list owner, please send an email to
mailto:[log in to unmask]
**********************************************************************
**********************************************************************
1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example,
send an email to mailto:[log in to unmask] with the following
message:
set psci-com nomail -- [include hyphens]
2. To resume email from the list, send an email to
[log in to unmask] with the message:
set psci-com mail -- [include hyphens]
3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the
message:
leave psci-com -- [include hyphens]
4. Further information about the psci-com discussion list, including
list archive, can be found at the list web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html
5. The psci-com gateway to internet resources on science communication
and science and society can be found at http://psci-com.ac.uk
6. To contact the Psci-com list owner, please send an email to
mailto:[log in to unmask]
**********************************************************************
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
Scanned for viruses and spam by emailsystems
If you believe this email is spam, please forward via email to
[log in to unmask]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The British Psychological Society
This email is intended for the addressee only. It may contain confidential information: disclosure of or action in reliance upon this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us by return email and delete the message.
Any views are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Society, which accepts no liability for the consequences of any actions taken on the basis of this information unless confirmed in writing by a Society Manager.
We accept no liability for any loss or damage caused by viruses: you are advised to conduct your own checks on any attachments. When emailing us, be aware that email is not a 100 percent secure medium.
The British Psychological Society is a charity registered in England and Wales, Registration Number : 229642 and a charity registered in Scotland, Registration Number : SC039452 - VAT Registration Number : 240 3937 76
www.bps.org.uk
**************************
**********************************************************************
1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example,
send an email to mailto:[log in to unmask] with the following message:
set psci-com nomail -- [include hyphens]
2. To resume email from the list, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the message:
set psci-com mail -- [include hyphens]
3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the message:
leave psci-com -- [include hyphens]
4. Further information about the psci-com discussion list, including list archive, can be found at the list web site: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html
5. The psci-com gateway to internet resources on science communication and science and society can be found at http://psci-com.ac.uk
6. To contact the Psci-com list owner, please send an email to mailto:[log in to unmask]
**********************************************************************
|
