Influences of the Media on Reactions to Scientific Discoveries and Studies

The news media has great influence over many aspects of modern life—especially the relay of scientific discovery and study to the general public—but journalists can unintentionally skew how the public receives the information by embellishing or minimizing the facts in news stories. After discussing the impact that journalism has on public perception of science and the credibility of researchers, analyzing two news articles about the discovery of a possible new species by Lee Berger in South Africa, and then analyzing the research article authored by Berger about this discovery we can see how it is that journalists can distort facts and falsely influence how the public perceives scientific information.

It is commonly known that the news media has great impact on how we, as people, perceive a great many things; whether we are reading a newspaper, watching a news show, or reading news on the internet we are influenced in how we perceive these reports by the way they are written or orally transmitted to us. The influence that journalists hold can be intentionally and unintentionally misused—especially in scientific journalism. Facts can be exaggerated or minimized by a journalist that does not fully understand what they are reporting on, or by a journalist that is trying to make the story more interesting for readers. Exaggeration can gravely affect the credibility of research, and the researchers: "Exaggeration serves many interests, but it does not serve the public's interest. And in the end, it is self-defeating, because it undermines the credibility of . . . science" (Schwartz and Woloshin as quoted in Schroeder 2010). Scientists can help to keep journalists better informed by understanding that they may not have a special interest area that they report on, but rather are more general and take what assignments are given to them. Christina Astin, of Nature, suggests that in the future ". . . the scientific community should work with journalism schools and professional societies to ensure that journalism programmes include some grounding in what science is, and how the process of experiment, review and publication actually works" (Astin 2009) and Jane Schroeder, of Environmental Health Perspectives, suggests that "science communication to a broad audience may be facilitated by translation and reframing, but we also have a responsibility to communicate in a way that will help improve the public's ability to understand the implications of environmental health research" (Schroeder 2010). Translating scientific terms can be used in all areas of scientific journalism, and the research behind that journalism, so as to facilitate readers and audiences in understanding what is being reported to them. It is this sort of forward that thinking will help to keep the public properly informed about scientific discovery and research now and well into the future.

As previously discussed, exaggeration