Science & Society -- From Dissemination to Deliberation

2,288 views
2,185 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
3 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,288
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
290
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
31
Comments
0
Likes
3
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Science & Society -- From Dissemination to Deliberation

  1. 1. International Conference on Science Communication, Teadusrikkuse levialas, Talin / Estonia, October 2010 Alexander Gerber Managing Partner, innocomm Head of Marketing  & Communications, Fraunhofer ICT Group Science & Society From Dissemination to Deliberation http://www.slideshare.net/AlexanderGerber/DebateTallinn @InnoVisions / #SciEst
  2. 2. 2 Status Quo: Dissemination Gaskell et al. (2006). "Europeans and Biotechnology in 2005: Patterns and Trends" Eurobarometer 64.3 http://ec.europa.eu/research/press/2006/pdf/pr1906_eb_64_3_final_report-may 2006_en.pdf (zuletzt 19.09.2010) “Which of these technologies will improve our way of life in the 20 years?”
  3. 3. 3 winner looser still open Status Quo: Dissemination Gaskell et al. (2006). "Europeans and Biotechnology in 2005: Patterns and Trends" Eurobarometer 64.3 http://ec.europa.eu/research/press/2006/pdf/pr1906_eb_64_3_final_report-may 2006_en.pdf (zuletzt 19.09.2010) “Which of these technologies will improve our way of life in the 20 years?”
  4. 4. 4 Status Quo: Dissemination ► How do science communicators try to influence this agenda?
  5. 5. 5 Status Quo: Dissemination ► How do science communicators try to influence this agenda?
  6. 6. 6 Status Quo: Dissemination ► What about these…?
  7. 7. 7 Status Quo: Dissemination We are used to justify the way our institution uses its resources. ► Who decides (in the future) about the research agenda?
  8. 8. 8 Status Quo: Dissemination Listening is the new marketing. Social Media puts the public back into PR and the market back into marketing. As marketing budgets are being  slashed, having a roster of  employees who want to go out and  communicate with customers  directly is really cost‐effective. Bryan Rhoads, Digital Strategist, Intel Brian Solls
  9. 9. 9 Status Quo: Dissemination We are used to fulfill the information needs of the media. ► Which channels are substituting the decreasing press impact? slideshare.net/AlexanderGerber Blog: scienceblogs.de/sic
  10. 10. 10 Status Quo: Dissemination We are used to fulfill the information needs of the media. ► Which channels are substituting the decreasing press impact? 2000         2001      2002     2003    2004      2005       2006        2007         2008     2009 120.000 100.000 80.000 60.000 40.000 20.000
  11. 11. 11 Status Quo: Dissemination http://www.nasaspaceflight.com (Technorati-Authority: 554, Science Rank: 4)
  12. 12. 12 Status Quo: Dissemination http://www.wired.com/wiredscience (Technorati-Authority: 720, Science Rank: 1)
  13. 13. 13 Status Quo: Dissemination http://www.scilogs.de http://www.scienceblogs.de Scienceblogs in Germany, after less than three years, reaches more “Unique User” than the three main popular science magazines Bild der Wissenschaft, Spektrum der Wissenschaft und Technology Review have together in subscriptions.
  14. 14. 14 Status Quo: Dissemination http://www.dlr.de/blogs/desktopdefault.aspx http://twitter.com/dlr_de http://www.linkedin.com/company/dlr The four DLR blogs reach approximately 30.000 “Unique User”.
  15. 15. 15 Status Quo: Dissemination http://www.scienceblogs.de/astrodicticum-simplex Possible the best-read German science blog (65.000+ comments in two years)
  16. 16. 16 Status Quo: Dissemination http://www.scienceblogs.de/sic Blog about science communication, especially with regard to interactive media
  17. 17. 17 Status Quo: Dissemination We are used to mainly answer what it is that out institution is doing. ► Why don’t we ask the questions ourselves? http://blog.iao.fraunhofer.de (PageRank 6/10, 4.000+ Trackbacks) Several awards for individual postings after just a few months online (webnews.de, yigg.de, scoop.at etc.)
  18. 18. 18 Status Quo: Dissemination We are used to mainly answer what it is that out institution is doing. ► Why don’t we ask the questions ourselves?  yet2.com  innocentive.com Theory: IBIS Grammar (definition of elements / icons and their  linking) of tools like Compendium or Debategraph has been  explicitly developed for such planning discourses.
  19. 19. 19 Status Quo: Dissemination We are used to mainly answer what it is that out institution is doing. ► Why don’t we ask the questions ourselves? Brainstorming: collect >> vote >> select ideas Example: spot.us  People publicly suggest subjects online; other users comment and vote  Journalists pick up suggestions and publicly offer their exposés (incl. Production costs)  Users contribute money until the article is budgeted  The journalist goes and researches and writes his piece  Spot.us reviews the text and sees that it is going to be published  The users may get a share of the royalty
  20. 20. 20 Status Quo: Dissemination We are used to mainly answer what it is that out institution is doing. ► Why don’t we ask the questions ourselves?  Echologic.org: e-participation / e-democracy  Idea-a-day.com: exchange and trade ideas
  21. 21. 21 Status Quo: Dissemination We are used to mainly answer what it is that out institution is doing. ► Why don’t we ask the questions ourselves?  delib.co.uk: share, store and rate ideas  spigit.com: collective intelligence and knowledge management
  22. 22. 22 Status Quo: Dissemination We neglect the most basic principles of marketing. ► Do you really think you know what your “customers” need?
  23. 23. 23 Information and justification FROM Communication and collaboration TO Offering your competencies FROM Listening to your customers’ needs TO
  24. 24. 24 Lookout: Collaboration So-called Prosumers… ► expect a true dialogue with research institutions ► demand transparency and an unmediated discourse
  25. 25. 25 Lookout: Collaboration Still think you’re in colntrol? ► BP tryied to “control” public debate by buying masses of search terms (ca. $10,000 / day).
  26. 26. 26 Lookout: Collaboration Debate nowadays is beyond control! Connections between people using "oil spill" on Twitter. As analyzed by Marc Smith from ConnectedAction in May 2010, there is not real 'center' of discussion yet.
  27. 27. 27 Lookout: Collaboration We should be seeking transparency in order to… ► build up trust in new technologies ► promote readiness for change
  28. 28. 28 Relevance of Science in the Media We should be seeking transparency in order to… ► build up trust in new technologies ► promote readiness for change Study: Prime-time news in European television  increase in number and airtime of science stories (x 4 since 1989)  45 Sci-Tech topics among the 2676 news stories (< 2 %)
  29. 29. 29 Relevance of Science in Society Study: Eurobarometer  1 out of 4 Europeans believes, that only genetically modified tomatoes contain genes, whereas non-GM tomatoes do not.  Almost every second European believes that human genes function differently from those in animals.
  30. 30. 30 Relevance of Science in Politics Innokomm Trend Study: General elections in Germany 2009  1 out of 9 people believed that the relevance of science during the campaign had increased (compared to the previous election).
  31. 31. 31 How do Governments React? Example: U.S. Science Debate 2008 171 TV interviews 2975 questions 6 questions about “climate change” 3 questions about "UFOs" >> „Reason why“
  32. 32. 32 How do Governments React? Elections for Riigikogu in March 2011.
  33. 33. 33 How do Governments React? Elections for Riigikogu in March 2011. ► Which relevance will science gain in the campaigns?
  34. 34. 34 The Objectives of such Initiatives  Involve a much wider public in the process of defining the main issues and challenges of science in order to empower the so-called prosumers almost at eye-level with experts and political decision-makers. ► Build up a Scientific Citizenship and increase the social impact on science!  Reveal the conflicting viewpoints towards controversial subjects in science and technology. ► Make the process of creating knowledge more open and transparent!  Increase the societal feedback to industrial research, development, innovation and new technologies in general, as well as to the plans within national regulation policies leading to an interactive value creation and... ► Foster public readiness for change by building trust!
  35. 35. 35 The Objectives of such Initiatives  Involve a much wider public in the process of defining the main issues and challenges of science in order to empower the so-called prosumers almost at eye-level with experts and political decision-makers. ► Build up a Scientific Citizenship and increase the social impact on science!  Reveal the conflicting viewpoints towards controversial subjects in science and technology. ► Make the process of creating knowledge more open and transparent!  Increase the societal feedback to industrial research, development, innovation and new technologies in general, as well as to the plans within national regulation policies leading to an interactive value creation and... ► Foster public readiness for change by building trust!
  36. 36. 36 Challenged by Complexity Uncertainty cannot be an excuse for ignoring knowledge. Debates are threatened to become victims of their own success.
  37. 37. 37 Challenged by Complexity  How can many people discuss complex issues? How can large -scale online deliberation be accomplished?  How can hundreds of people engage in a debate and still find their way and orientation within the thread? How can they intuitively explore a highly complex subject in depth? ► new collaboration and visualization technologies  Who is qualified to neutrally conduct and moderate such a discourse, manage the sub-communities, research, validate and contrast certain facts, put these into the right context, initiate new discussions, activate, approach and interview important players? ► new line of action for science and innovation journalists!
  38. 38. 38 A New Science Journalism ► Embed / validate / check / contrast / contextualize facts ► Moderate the discourse ► Research pros and cons ► Manage sub-communities / networks ► Initiate new discussions ► Activate, approach and interview important players As demanded by the World Economic Forum, journalism has to move from gatekeeping to a networked model, “where journalists […] bring sources and audience closer to each other, facilitating constructive interaction in society” (Nordfors 2009).
  39. 39. 39 Lookout: Deliberation People get access to dispersed knowledge. The entire trial and error process becomes transparent.  Mind Mapping: Freemind family /commercial  brothers and sisters, Mindmeister / Xmind  Compendium: Dialogue‐Mapping, open‐ source, from Open University  Cohere: Open University, Argumentation and  Web‐Annotation  BCisive and Rationale: Argument Mapping  Debategraph: Debate‐Mapping: not open‐ source, but free = not being commercial
  40. 40. 40 Lookout: Deliberation People get access to dispersed knowledge. The entire trial and error process becomes transparent. Differences:  online/offline  for profit/non profit  Interactive and collaborative Usecases:  personal knowledge management  education and learning  visual tool for moderation of group‐discussion  open debate Argument maps do for deliberation what a chess  board does for chess. Deliberation without one is  like playing chess without the help of a reference  tracking chess board.  Martin Hilbert, Annenberg School of Communication, University of Southern California
  41. 41. 41 Lookout: Deliberation The Independent applied “Debategraph” to deal with the complexity of the issue of climate change: http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate‐ change/debategraph‐copenhagen‐‐whats‐happening‐1835880.html
  42. 42. 42 Chesbrough Howe Hippel Open Innovation Trust Creation Luhmann Malone Gloor Rogers Blumer Market Diffusion Decentralizing Decision Making E‐Collaboration E‐Democracy Deliberative Democracy CSCW Collaborative Innovation Networks Symbolic Interactionism Media Democracy Veld Friedmann Norris Hilbert Davies / GangadharanNoveck An interdisciplinary challenge
  43. 43. 43 Science in Society FROM Society into Science TO Public Understanding of Science FROM Scientific Citizenship TO
  44. 44. 45 Alexander Gerber‐Crawford Managing Partner, innocomm Head of Marketing Communications, Fraunhofer ICT Group a.gerber@innokomm.eu +49 (0)30 ‐ 577 076 ‐ 141               Skype: InnoVisions Blog: scienceblogs.de/sic Nature Network: alex_gerber Twitter: InnoVisions Slideshare: AlexanderGerber Delicious: InnoComm Linked‐in: alexandergerber Facebook: AlexanderGerber Xing: Alexander_Gerber3 Competence Site: Alexander‐Gerber ResearchGate: Alexander_Gerber

×