“Don’t use words too big for the subject. Don’t say infinitely when you mean very; otherwise you’ll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite.” CS Lewis
Recently, I had the good fortune and pleasure to attend presentations given by two public figures in the field of mass communications and media. One, was a ‘performance’ by Micheal Palin, who is best known for his travel programmes, as well as his television acting, particularly in the Monty Python series. The other, was by Tom Clarke, the Science Editor for Channel 4 News in the UK. Michael spoke about his travel series (his experiences, behind the scenes stories, etc., etc.), and in the second half of the show how he got into performing, writing and television. Tom was at the University of Northampton to receive the inaugural Francis Crick Award for science journalism. His brief speech and the subsequent questions focused heavily on the subject of climate change.
Both events got me thinking about communication and specifically two issues. One, public skepticism/suspicion of all things scientific (including climate change), and how best could that be overcome. Secondly, the role of academics as communicators of science. In one of my modules, my students said to me that people are more aware of environmental issues. And indeed there is no shortage of information to be found on the net. In addition, legislation, for example, in Europe mandates more public access to information. This has led in part to the development of many ‘experts’, but also much cynicism of scientific principles. Issac Asimov, the well known American biochemist and science fiction author makes note of the fact that “The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom.”
As academics, how do we overcome this cynicism and best fulfill our role as public communicators? There are a number of factors, but perhaps three are particularly important. First, the best communicators are able to convey complex issues in a simple manner, to a wide range of audiences. Take a look at the quote above from the noted novelist, poet, theologian, critic and Medieval and Renaissance essayist, CS Lewis. Being able to engage effectively, is without doubt a necessary asset. Increasingly, universities are creating specific (usually professorial) roles for public engagement. Academics such as Professors Brian Cox, Stephen Hawking and Richard Dawkins are all well known for their media work and popular science. Interestingly, however, Tom made mention of the fact that even though he had done a science degree, to be a good scientific journalist, you don’t have to be a scientist. And indeed, some of his better pieces were those that didn’t touch on things that he focused on in his degree, because it meant that he’d been more inquisitive in investigating and reporting the story. Secondly, and linked to the first, is the need to really know and understand your subject. Anyone can read something and become an ‘expert’ in it, but that doesn’t mean that they truly understand the complexities of the subject(s). Third, there has to be an element of trust and credibility. In some respects, these come with the first two. Through trust and credibility, public engagement (and reduced cynicism) should follow.