Existe una tendencia en los estudios CTS contemporáneos a contraponer modelos deficitarios y modelos democráticos de divulgación científica. Esta contraposición suele apoyarse en lo que se conoce como el nuevo contrato social sobre ciencia y tecnología, y puede formularse así: mientras el viejo contrato social implicaba un modelo deficitario de divulgación científica, el nuevo contrato social implica un modelo democrático, que no es deficitario. En este artículo, defiendo la tesis de que dicha contraposición está mal fundada por dos razones. En (...) primer lugar, el nuevo contrato social es compatible con diversos modelos democráticos de divulgación científica, y estos modelos no son compatibles entre sí necesariamente. En segundo lugar, algunos de estos modelos democráticos pueden calificarse también como deficitarios. Esto deja abierta la pregunta de cómo entender la divulgación científica en el marco del nuevo contrato social sobre ciencia y tecnología. (shrink)

This article grasps the coercive character often associated to research impact metrics, in the wake of the ever-growing use of quantitative indicators for the evaluation of the academic performance. It does so by taking a Marxian perspective which underscores what are the historically determined attributes of academic labour that the functioning of impact metrics embodies, unfolding thereby what ‘impact’ really means concerning said social attributes of the scientific enterprise. Science communication via social media, and the array of metrics and indicators (...) surrounding it, known as alternative metrics or altmetrics, are taken as a case study. This study concludes that the coercive nature of research impact metrics is grounded on the private and independent character taken by social labour in capitalist production, an historically determined form of the social reproduction that asks for academic production to be organised and regulated in an indirect fashion, behind the backs of producers themselves – in the particular case of science, by means of quantitative indicators and performance metrics. As research impact metrics bear the power to determine how and to what extent academic labourers contribute to the general productive process, their will and consciousness become thus subsumed to such reified social subject. (shrink)

Science communication in online media is a discursive domain where science-related content is often expressed through styles characteristic of popular journalism. This article aims to characterize some dominant stylistic patterns in magazine articles devoted to environmental issues by identifying the devices used to enhance newsworthiness, given the fact that for some readers environmental topics may no longer seem engaging. The analytic perspective is an adaptation of the newsworthiness framework that has been applied in news discourse studies. The material is a (...) sample of the 38 most-read environment-oriented articles in the online version of the international science magazine New Scientist collected between late 2013 and late 2014. The articles are analysed qualitatively to show the instantiations of such newsworthiness criteria as novelty and superlativeness, timeliness and impact, negativity and positivity as well as other strategies aimed at engaging the readers: rationalization and speculation, direct address and conversational style. The analysis reveals how, in this case study, science communication is turned into infotainment and considers the implications of this discursive shift for the public understanding of environmental science. (shrink)

The article includes a discussion of two models which describe contemporary communication processes in journalism: agenda-setting and news value, indicating the need to expand their research tools to include qualitative methods, and merging the analyses of the reception and the message. It also includes indications as to the possibility, or even the social relevance, of the methods for applying those research perspectives to analysing journalism popularising science. Later, I present the results of an analysis of the content of a sample (...) of 500 most read popular science texts available on the New Scientist website. I demonstrate which thematic areas were valued by the readers, and what values are most commonly applied. Further, upon applying a filter in the form of surveys regarding reader preferences, I discuss the main linguistic devices utilised for controlling readers’ attention. The shaping of the hierarchy of importance of items of news is the result of a dynamic interaction between the thematic priorities and discursive strategies of imposing elite representations of science within media agenda, and the means of negotiating order and values of specific content, which are correlated with readers’ preferences, both in terms of the content and the form of providing popular scientific information. (shrink)

This paper develops a fourth model of public engagement with science, grounded in the principle of nurturing scientific agency through participatory bioethics. It argues that social media is an effective device through which to enable such engagement, as it has the capacity to empower users and transforms audiences into co-producers of knowledge, rather than consumers of content. Social media also fosters greater engagement with the political and legal implications of science, thus promoting the value of scientific citizenship. This argument is (...) explored by considering the case of nanoscience and nanotechnology, as an exemplar for how emerging technologies may be handled by the scientific community and science policymakers. (shrink)