When we think about the role and responsibilities of a scientist we think of rigorous research methods, answering questions about our world or systems that are yet unknown. It is this enquiry, inquisitiveness that runs common amongst us all who toil away in the dark hours. How much thought do we give about our responsibilities to our society? The common man on the street who knows nothing about our ways. How often do we actually take pleasure in ‘Dumbing down’ our complicated worlds? How often do we consider sharing our ‘eureka’ moments with those same people who ultimately matter, for whom we really work for.
Scientists have a certain culture of being incomprehensible and yet this very elitist attitude is what will eventually slow us down.
I recently participated in BA’s Media Fellowship scheme where for a few weeks I wore the hat of a science journalist. Yes those very journalists we love to call names, those sly people who always sensationalise science and who make all scientists look like Frankenstein monsters. I was as sceptical as they come; I had read stories about how the discovery of one gene was the panacea to all disease and headlines that claimed of a pill that would cure cancers, obesity and everything in between. I often wondered how easy it was for journalists to pick up a complex scientific paper and interpret years of hard work and collaborations and theories into a 200 word piece; until I actually had to do it myself.
And to serve perfectly that sceptic in me I was placed with the Daily Mirror! I found myself going to press conferences held by experts in various scientific fields explaining their complex studies in 20 min blocks. How could I not comprehend what they were saying? I do very similar statistics and apply similar methods in my work. Slowly as days went by I realised where the glass wall lay. From where I sat this time around it was the scientist who found it difficult to make things simple and tell about their work as if it were an engaging story, leaving the poor journalists very little to hold on to. But then when I sit at my desk with my molecules dancing about in perfect harmony performing the perfect ballet, I see the story, the melody, and the dance. That’s what the man on the street; the tax payer wants to see as well. Who are we to deprive them if this performance? Isn’t it that very resource of the tax payers’ money we all look to tap into in our next funding bid? And how can we ignore the same person who will benefit from the cures we so desperately search?
I have now resolved that if I can’t write up my own work in a simple jargon free 200 words, I will not go into the coffee room and talk about The Sun or The Guardian getting a story skewed. I will not complain about the general public being complacent in voicing their opinions on matters of public health, scientific research methods and trends and education policies. We the forerunners and perhaps the guardians of this entire debate do not do our bit to educate them and keep them abreast. And then when the lobby groups get to them quicker we only pucker up our noses in disgust.
Its probably time we all looked up from our spectrophotometers and participated whole heartedly to get our society talking about science the way it should be regarded.
Scientists have a certain culture of being incomprehensible and yet this very elitist attitude is what will eventually slow us down.
I recently participated in BA’s Media Fellowship scheme where for a few weeks I wore the hat of a science journalist. Yes those very journalists we love to call names, those sly people who always sensationalise science and who make all scientists look like Frankenstein monsters. I was as sceptical as they come; I had read stories about how the discovery of one gene was the panacea to all disease and headlines that claimed of a pill that would cure cancers, obesity and everything in between. I often wondered how easy it was for journalists to pick up a complex scientific paper and interpret years of hard work and collaborations and theories into a 200 word piece; until I actually had to do it myself.
And to serve perfectly that sceptic in me I was placed with the Daily Mirror! I found myself going to press conferences held by experts in various scientific fields explaining their complex studies in 20 min blocks. How could I not comprehend what they were saying? I do very similar statistics and apply similar methods in my work. Slowly as days went by I realised where the glass wall lay. From where I sat this time around it was the scientist who found it difficult to make things simple and tell about their work as if it were an engaging story, leaving the poor journalists very little to hold on to. But then when I sit at my desk with my molecules dancing about in perfect harmony performing the perfect ballet, I see the story, the melody, and the dance. That’s what the man on the street; the tax payer wants to see as well. Who are we to deprive them if this performance? Isn’t it that very resource of the tax payers’ money we all look to tap into in our next funding bid? And how can we ignore the same person who will benefit from the cures we so desperately search?
I have now resolved that if I can’t write up my own work in a simple jargon free 200 words, I will not go into the coffee room and talk about The Sun or The Guardian getting a story skewed. I will not complain about the general public being complacent in voicing their opinions on matters of public health, scientific research methods and trends and education policies. We the forerunners and perhaps the guardians of this entire debate do not do our bit to educate them and keep them abreast. And then when the lobby groups get to them quicker we only pucker up our noses in disgust.
Its probably time we all looked up from our spectrophotometers and participated whole heartedly to get our society talking about science the way it should be regarded.
No comments:
Post a Comment