Deep within the Appalachian foothills, a quiet revolution began with one scientist’s big idea at a small community college. That palpably bohemian setting has a way of igniting surprising new passions for exploration. By October 2023, a significant challenge looms over the scientific community: only 57 percent of Americans trust mass media, according to the Pew Research Center. This decline in trust poses a dilemma for scientists who find themselves navigating a landscape where skepticism and misinformation frequently overshadow their work.
The roots of this skepticism run deep. In 2018, a record 39 percent of Americans said they had “not very much” or “no trust at all” in mass media. Instead, they have sought out other, unverified sources to get their news. As with a myriad of other negative trends, this one is particularly alarming. Almost a quarter of Americans think that scientists don’t have the public’s best interests at heart. This perception highlights the continual importance of, and need for, scientists to communicate honestly and openly with the public.
Climbing these hurdles has not stopped support for federal funding of scientific research from largely holding its own over the decades. This unique stability could provide the bridge for scientists to find their way to communities, build trust, and develop collaborative efforts. Too many of us retain the outdated image of science as million-dollar laboratories at Ivy League universities. This perception presents another barrier between researchers and the average public.
In January 2019, a survey revealed that 73 percent of Americans viewed science as having a “mostly positive effect on society.” However, this hopeful outlook has been undercut by signals from high-profile leaders in media and politics that are pushing dangerously antiscience narratives. His Joe Rogan Experience podcast reaches tens of millions of listeners, making it the most popular podcast in the world. It has hosted as guests antivaccine speaker Robert Malone and current presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., infamous for his antiscience rhetoric.
These developments highlight a broader issue. Some members of Congress have made statements questioning established scientific consensus, such as claims that global warming is a hoax. This type of inflammatory and hyperbolic language damages public confidence in expert opinion and can severely undermine the integrity of scientific findings.
Most academic institutions use an apprenticeship model in which faculty mentor graduate students to become the next generation of educators. This model incubates academic talent. At the same time, it has the potential to lead to an insular environment that cannot effectively communicate and connect with the public. As one scientist lamenting their path onto the academic career track explained, “I always thought that science should sit up on a pedestal behind a wall. I too drank the Kool-Aid, fell for the myth of the ivory tower.”
The “ivory tower” idea is especially daunting for scientists. They need to proactively dismantle obstacles and move in step with the world around them. The ivory tower black box. Through one side of the pipeline, federal funding and faceless men in lab coats come pouring in, and out comes vaccines, climate predictions, and invasive computer algorithms with no direct connection to real lives.
“We are not above the public. We are part of it, and we must use our training and our knowledge to better it.” – Unknown
To regain public trust, scientists must actively communicate their findings and engage with communities that may feel alienated from traditional scientific discourse. They need to face the uncomfortable truth that “surviving in a rapidly changing world requires less risk.” Humans have a tendency to stick with what is familiar and safe—a tendency that may become dangerous when it rejects new scientific breakthroughs.
As the National Science Foundation explains, it’s all about developing trust between the scientists and the community. Involving local communities in the process helps to build a commitment to common goals and a mutual appreciation. As one great philosopher put it, “Ain’t that the truth.” Non-scientists had a hand in making a world where a child can stare up at the stars from a hay field and go on to be an astrophysicist.
This sentiment beautifully encapsulates the potential for cross-disciplinary connections and outreach efforts that can inspire curiosity and trust in scientific endeavors.
The need for scientists to advocate outside the walls of the classroom and laboratory is more urgent than ever. We can’t forget that it’s deeply important to dismantle the walls that have long kept scientists out of the public sphere. As far as many people are concerned, good communication can make science feel like something actively relevant and relatable, as opposed to an esoteric thing pursued by others.
“I wish I could bottle the way I felt that hot Cambridge day. I wish I could stash it away, to be enjoyed like a nostalgic perfume.” – Unknown
As scientists consider what they owe society, they should make no mistake—scientific knowledge can and should help create an informed public. Through a commitment to engage with communities and foster dialogue, public trust is earned. It further raises the profile of science as the way to solve our nation’s most pressing challenges.
Leave a Reply