European need for independent science journalism

EUROPEAN NEED FOR INDEPENDENT SCIENCE JOURNALISM Dániel Gergő Pintér (Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences Institute for Computer Science and Control, Média 2.0) István Palugyai, Andrea Kárpáti (Eötvös Lóránd University, Budapest) Abstract The paper presents current research about the access of European adults to scientific and technological information and discusses the resulting image of science in public. European surveys indicate that citizens in this area experience a crisis of trust in journalism. In order to explain this serious obstacle for science communication, changes in media consumption and accessibility as well as changes in the habits of general news consumers will be discussed in order reveal opportunities and problematic issues of independent science journalism in Europe. The digital revolution and the media convergence, resulting in the interconnection of information and communication technologies, computer networks and media content spreading word wide resulted in a decline in scientific accuracy as generalist newsmen replaced science columnists, despite the layman reader’s needs for reliable, up to date and useful for everyday life scientific information. The danger of public relations information presented as science journalism as well as political efforts to influence independent science journalism will be analyzed through case studies. The new science media landscape is community driven: emerging forms of communicating science through social web or new media applications by citizen journalism. Giant academic networks involve scientist, who often follow discussions, discover recommended papers and comments on research-related topics using these channels. However, these channels do not reach the general public that needs to be informed by independent science journalists to act as responsible citizens and take part in socially relevant, science and technology bases policy decisions. As a conclusion, we summarize necessary steps to improve this profession. We suggest to reinvent its business models; build consumer relationships across multiple platforms; manage a mix of monetization models across advertising, subscriptions and stablish funding sources for investigative and independent science journalism. Keywords: science journalism, media consumption, independent journalism, European Union 1. Science and the general public 1.1. European adults and science-related information they obtain The majority of European public does not feel informed about the developments in science and technology, however, at least half of all Europeans are interested in these issues, according to Eurobarometer, 2013. Through this study, we can recognize a clear geographical pattern with Eastern and Southern countries: the population there are less likely to feel informed and at least half of all respondents in Bulgaria and the Czech Republic (both 59%), Hungary and Romania (both 58%), Austria and Slovakia (both 52%) and Portugal (50%) are neither interested in, nor informed about developments in science and technology.

When asked, where they seek information about developments in science and technology, only 16% of respondents replied that he/she does not look for information in this area at all. The majority (65%) is informed through television, the second large group through newspapers (33%), and the third through websites (32%). The rest find science and ecology-related information through the radio and books (17% and 14% respectively), while social media and blogs are frequented only by 10%. Compared to the results of the same survey in 2007, we may observe substantial changes: the relative frequency of newspapers as major sources of information decreased from 49% to 33%, the internet increased from 28% to 35%, and the radio decreased from 26% to 17%. Although internet usage globally became more and more important, we can observe relevant regional differences: the highest proportion of those using the internet for this kind of information are found in the Scandinavian and Baltic regions, while those living in central and Eastern regions are generally less likely to use the internet when searching for this type of information (Eurobarometer, 2013). We can observe the important but not unique role of media in science communication when we compare it to other sources. 59% of respondents told that they had read articles of science in printed press or on the internet. A surprisingly high 47% admitted to talking with friends about science, while only 13% had signed petitions or joined street demonstration, 10% attended public debates about scientific issues of social relevance, (Eurobarometer, 2005). When we are talking about public involvement, we have to realize a substantial regional diversification. While the majority of the member states emphasized that public dialogue was required, in five countries, the majority of respondents believed that it was not required, – and all these countries are located in the Eastern part of Europe (Slovenia, Slovakia, Latvia, Czech Republic and Hungary) (Eurobarometer, 2013). When we analyze answers to the question about who should be involved in explaining the developments in science and technology, we can see that respondents do not necessarily welcome journalists – a fact that may indicate a crisis of trust in journalism. Scientists and environmental protection associations are more trusted than television journalists. The next in the rank order of trusted sources are consumer organizations and medical doctors, while newspaper journalists occupy only the seventh place, before industry, writers and intellectuals. At the bottom of the science and technology-related trust list we find government representatives (Eurobarometer, 2013). Apparently, the media till has a big role to play in science communication, because the only relevant pieces of scientific information are often transmitted through mass media only. Therefore, it can have a strong influence on both the accessibility and applicability of particular issue attributes (Scheufele and Tewksbury, 2007). 1.2. The image of science in public Much more respondents (77%) think that science and technology have a positive influence on society overall than say they feel informed (40%) or interested (53%). In addition, three quarters of respondents agree that science and technology provide more opportunities for future generations. Nevertheless, we have to notice that at least six out of ten respondents in each country also agree that scientific and technological developments can have unforeseen sideeffects that are harmful to human health and the environment (Eurobarometer, 2013). In the last few decades, the perception of science and scientists has changed, and not always in a good way. The image of the “mad scientist” with “Armageddon devices” (as seen in the movies), dividing issues like stem cells or GMO had a bad influence on the attitude towards science, as they projected an untrustworthy image of the field. Perceptions have big influence on beliefs: for example, there is a direct relationship between the perception of science and the attitudes towards its public funding. Those who have a positive perception of science tend to support its public funding as well (Munoz, 2012). Survey results show, that „the media can play

a crucial role as an interface in the science domain, helping to increase public support and understanding the need to create a knowledge-based society.” (Eurobarometer, 2007) Science journalism has a mediative role: the journalist has to measure up to the scientific world and the media too. Thus, usually it is the media that is chosen as the whipping-boy, the media is blamed for the negative attitudes of public to science and scientists in general. Because of the ‘blame the messenger’ perspective, the media has been held responsible for misrepresentations of scientific ideas for the public and, consequently, for the insufficient appreciation of scientific achievement by the public itself (Bucchi, 1998). As science and technology developments speed up, there is a growing gap between science communities and the public in the level of understanding new discoveries and their consequences. Our chances to close this gap are weakened by global problems of quality and access to science education. 2. Current trends of media consumption 2.1. Consumption and accessibility The internet has an increasingly important role in people’s lives. American adults find it much harder to give up internet than television use. This trend is a result of considerable changes in the past 8 years. In a survey where indispensable for life information resources had to be selected and ranked, results changed between 2006 and 2014, but the dominance of television did not. In 2006, 38% or respondents said that it would be very hard to give up using the internet, while 44% found it difficult to live without TV. In 2007, the internet was found impossible to miss by 45%, and TV by 43%, and in 2014, the internet was chosen by 53%, while TV was only selected by 35% as an indispensable resource. (Pew Research, 2014). In addition, internet use has grown from 14% in 1995 to 87% in 2014 (Pew, 2014), so accessibility became much easier – an issue that also contributed to a gradual replacement of television with the internet as the most important platform of information and leisure. In the United States, the internet has gained importance also for Americans, but television saved its leading role. What is more: it increased its popularity. In 2010, television was selected by 66% of respondents as indispensable, while the internet got 41%. In 2013, TV was preferred by 69%, while the internet by 50%. This poll shows a growing importance for the journalist too: 54% of the respondents said that journalists are more important these days than ever to help make sense of the amount of available news and information. The average time spent with the consumption of different media has significantly changed: in 2010 the US adults spent 4 hours and 24 minutes (4:24) with watching television and 3:11 with using internet, but in 2013, TV time was 4:31 (1:20 increase) while Internet use increased by 2:05, to 5:16. At the same time, printed media consumption decreased from 0:50 to 0:32, and radio from 1:36 to 1:26 (emarketer, 2013). Current trends in the internet penetration show that 63.5% of the European population uses the internet (2012, Internet World Stats), and we know from 2010 that Europe is currently the world's second largest digital market behind Asia Pacific (com.score 2010). If we focus on Central and Eastern Europe including Russia, we may make predictions from the data of 2012 that show 211.01 million internet users in this area including Russia (eMarketer 2012). The emarketer’s forecast is that in 2016 there will be 270.8 million internet users. If current trends will continue, a large portion of users will access the web via a mobile device (emarketer 2012). The number of social media users in Central and Eastern Europe shows fast increase: in 2010 the 65.2% of internet users, and 26.6% of population (113.1 million users) used social media, in 2011 there were 129.9 million social media users that means 67.6% of internet users and 30.6% of population, in 2012 there were 145.6 million (69.0%, 34.3%), and in 2013 there were 173.6 million users (82.27%, 40.89%). According to the predictions for 2014, the share of

Central and Eastern Europe would exceed that of North America (181.2 million 2013,) for the first time. (New Media Trend Watch, 2013). 2.2. Changes in the habits of general news consumers In the past few years we can observe interesting characteristics of media consumption. The average reader quickly orientates among the daily news, he or she mostly pays attention to the headline and the lead, and usually doesn’t spend much time with one news item. The need for specialized knowledge is limited, too, the news editors have to operate with simple facts and statements. Readers don’t want to linger on stories for long, and there is a demand for more compartmentalized stories (even the more educated science news consumers.) This technological paradigm shift has many consequences for the conventional media but mostly for the public representation of scientific topics. Thanks to the digital revolution and the media convergence, the number of US newspapers with weekly science sections dropped from 95 in 1989 to 19 in 2012 (Columbia Journalism Review 2013). While the phenomenon of involving the interconnection of information and communication technologies, computer networks and media content spreading word wide (Jenkins, 2004), in some big European publishing houses specialized editorial departments are closed down and replaced by centralized editorial offices delivering theme pages on health, the automobile industry, IT, etc., to all regional newspapers. As a consequence, the existing science, medical, environmental etc. editorial departments will become dispensable despite the layman reader’s needs for reliable, up to date scientific information useful for everyday life. One of the major models of public understanding of science is the development of contextual approach. This pattern assumes that the society calls for scientific information to be given to the public in ways that relate to their specific interests and concerns (Gregory and Miller, 1998). In this process, the science sections of daily newspapers play an important role in the cooperation between scientists and the public to work together as members of a scientific culture. 2.3. Online news sites versus blogs and social media Over the last 5 years, an average of 15 papers, or just about 1% of the press industry has vanished each year. While the printed media suffers from advertising clutter, financial deficit, perceived editorial bias, declining quality and rate inequities, the online news portals became more and more popular and their science sections gained more readers. Even though news portals are still one-way communication channels and often politically oriented or tied to local business, they are considered to be more open and liberal than their printed counterparts. The most important reason for the popularity of online news sites is the possibility of interactivity where information transfer was passive previously. The digital era is characterized by unprecedented levels of consumer choice, ubiquity and much more dynamic environment than traditional media (Salovaara-Moring, 2012). In the new era of media users, the appearance of blogs and social media pages breaks down the old definition of mass communication because online portals are increasingly attracting the public instead of being pushed at it. According to eBizMBA Rank, in October, 2014, the three most popular news site in the world were YahooNews, GoogleNews and Huffington Post (eBizMBA, 2014). Their users are independent people who decide individually or collectively what to consume and what to reject (Salovaara-Moring, 2012). The structure of these discussion or informational sites encourages the visitors not only to read a topic, but to rate, rank, comment on, review and respond. In this collective community consumers can interact and voice their

opinions on issues. Last but not least one of the biggest advantages of online media portals is that they are micro-chunked rather than monolithic. Through this technology, blogs users can read posts and listen to audio content or watch embedded video in various formats (SalovaaraMoring, 2012). 2.4. Citizen journalism and new media in science coverage Because of new media technology in the background, non-professionals are often able to gather information, distribute content and report breaking news faster and less expensively than traditional communication specialists and mainstream news organizations. Owing to the web 2.0 applications, media-sharing websites and the increasing presence of smartphones, the direct consumer model is expanding. The layman without professional journalism training and specialized education can use the latest technology, worldwide distribution and communication to collect, disseminate and analyse news on blogs, wikis and sharing websites using mobile and wireless technologies on a large scale (Carpenter, 2010). It is important to note, that conventional online media adapt much easier to the challenge of social media and blogs than print media. Thanks to the emergence of the internet, websites take scientific topics straight to readers and provide content to general online news sites such as Yahoo. Universities, scientific academies and research institutions are also publicizing news directly to audiences through their own websites, social media platforms and video channels. Corporate communication plays an important role in public understanding of science, because this set of activities helps organizations explain their scientific results, social responsibility and combine its many visions and values into a cohesive message to group of targets or stakeholders (Lammers, 2011). According to a current survey published in Nature (Noorden, 2014), giant academic social networks have taken off to a degree that no one expected even a few years ago. During the collection of data, a subset of scholars who said they “regularly visited” social media sites were quizzed in detail about their activities. Based on the results, a scientist often follows discussions, discovers recommended papers and comments on research-related topics using these channels. From more than 3000 scientists and engineers, no more than 20% declared not to use any social media sites professionally. For example, more than 4.5 million researchers have signed up for ResearchGate, but they often use Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, Academia.edu and Mendely also to post their work, seek a job-opportunity or share links to authored content (Noorden, 2014). While the number of online collaborations and the size of the social-media world has grown rapidly, many science journals are also available now on Twitter, Facebook, Flickr, Google+ and YouTube. These sites provide new ways of communication with consumers and establish the possibility of public participation in scientific research (PPSR) that includes citizen science, volunteer monitoring, data collecting, survey management and other forms of organized research. It is important to decide if these new forms of online collaborations and informationflow are merely supplements or even substitutes of conventional journalistic reporting? In the not so distant future, scientific communities will find out which form of science reporting is likely to reach wider audiences and how to find the right voice, and how to define success in sharing best practices through the World Wide Web. 3. Financial crisis and the media industry Since 2008, the media has been strongly affected by the global financial crisis, especially in the post socialist countries in Central and South Eastern Europe. The collapse of large financial institutions, stock markets and housing market has brought havoc on the entertainment industry

too, especially the sectors most dependent on advertising and consumer spending. Before this economic meltdown, many national media companies had already been suffering from the shrink of their primary audience but due to the crisis of the media industry, they have lost 30 to 60 percent of their income in the European region. Because of the relatively slow growth of digital revenue, decision-makers in the business sector had to face with the problems of lower advertising, declining consumption, collapse of share prices and increased unemployment (Chahine, Künstner and Vollmer 2008). In this challenging period, media companies were forced to adopt cost-saving measures, including reduced volume, staff layoffs, reduced investigative reporting, and cuts in international and provincial coverage. Several media markets experienced a flight of foreign investors and bankruptcies of independent outlets. The crisis-related constraints and ownership changes caused an overall drop in the quality of news delivery to citizens. Media content has become shallower, more entertainment-focused, increasingly isolationist, more prone to political and business influences, and lacking in investigative bite including less science news! To handle this crisis and succeed, communication experts have to reinvent their business models and reducing costs first and foremost. Following this, resulting savings need to be invested in capabilities and assets that will drive the next generation of growth. Consequently, local companies must excel in developing deep audience insights; build consumer relationships across multiple platforms and user environments; create targeted content, applications, and advertising opportunities and manage a mix of monetization models across advertising, subscriptions, and commerce. (Corwin, Egol, Hawkes, Tucker, Vogelsang and Vollmer, 2009). Last but not least, media companies have to generate more scientific content to improve the society’s technological attitude and public understanding of science. 3.1. Science journalism and Public Relations in the times of financial crisis While independent journalistic coverage is decreasing and editorial staffs are being reduced, Public Relations is gaining importance and PR products replace journalistic works without being sufficiently identified as PR. Because Public Relations can lead to strong community and industrial partnerships, and even financial support from large companies, the number of PR workers is growing dynamically. For example, in the 90’s, there were 162 000 Public Relations professional in the United States, but in 2010 their number was almost 260 000. According to a recent feature on Yahoo Education, employment of public relations specialists is expected to grow 23 percent from 2010 to 2020, faster than the average for all occupations. Meanwhile, in the last twenty years, the number of journalists has been reduced from 122 000 to 90 000 (Allen, 2013). Another indicator of job popularity is the list of the best and worst jobs of 2013 from the career website CareerCast.com. This compilation further documents the sombre state of journalism. Public relations executive ranks No. 74 on the list, while broadcaster and photojournalist rank near the bottom of the 200 jobs listed (CareerCast, 2013). European countries are following the same direction. In Switzerland for example, in 2013, there were nearly twice as many communication positions at major universities as there are conventional science-journalist jobs. In the 21th century, the raising professionalism in Public Relations start to create popular and demanding jobs in different fields of communication that increasingly copy journalistic working methods. Since the role of media relations is changing, because of technology’s impact on communications, branded content is on the rise and the PR industry is undeniably booming. The new generation of media experts take on similar tasks as journalists to advance, promote, and benefit the reputation of a product or institution and journalists are often replaced by them. In the changing media environment, PR uses more and more journalistic personnel and the flexible skills required for PR professionals include journalistic writing also (Göpfert 2008).

4. Dangerous trends for independent science journalism In 1990, an analysis about the influence of public relations on journalism pointed out that PR seems to control subject matter and timing of media coverage as well. According to this interpretation, two-third of the science coverage of news agencies is based on information of PR (Baerns, 1990). Currently, this number could be much higher and one third or less of science coverage is due to the initiative and independent research of science journalists. Nowadays, due to the low fees usually paid to freelancers, they are forced to supplement their journalistic work with PR activities and as a consequence, Public Relations jobs have taken on a pseudo-journalistic style. Thanks to this trend, while the PR-dependent infotainment quality of science journalism strengthens, its investigative critical character declines. A recent online survey on journalism ethics revealed that the lack of transparency in using PR material is a very dangerous course to follow, because of credibility standpoints (Vermij, 2013). Besides these dangerous trends, there is political menace for science journalism too. Today, science related topics are not independent from the politics especially in issues that are influenced by social conflicts, for example hydrology, genetically modified organisms, climate change, nuclear energy development or the health industry. In Europe, there are long-term, noticeable effects of the politicization of science when governments or various business groups use economic pressure to influence the findings of academic research or the way it is interpreted (Gauchat, 2012). The rate of democracy influences the distortion and the balance of news also – especially, but not only in post socialist countries. Governments are often attempt to overwhelm objective scientific evidence and to appoint loyal individuals in a variety of positions in order to promote their ideological agenda. 5. An opportunity to improve To improve the opportunities of science journalism, participants of the media and politics should create better circumstances. There is a big urge to define a new business model for the media, and discuss how investigative and independent science journalism could be part of a business model. For improvements in this field, politicians have to recognize the role of independent science journalism within independent journalism, and have to pay more attention to messages from journalists and researchers. This could influence the mentality of media leaders, and could help obtain more substantial moral and financial support. The European Union should promote science journalism in different ways: EU should fund new prizes to recognize excellence, establish supported training programs, clear up relationships with PR, and elaborate new and more transparent communication and management models. Some national and international associations already exist (European Union of Science Journalists’ Associations/EUSJA/, ABSW, UGIS etc.), but there should be more professional bodies that should actively build bridges between different stakeholders in science journalism. Summary Traditional science journalism is in crisis. According to statistics, less and less people get scientific and technological information from printed newspapers, and consequently, newspaper journalists are only the seventh place on the list of those who would be involved in explaining developments in science and technology, according to statistics (Eurobarometer, 2013). Although 77% of respondents think that science and technology have a positive influence on society, only 40% feel informed and 53% feel interested. The lack of information and socially

and / or economically and politically sensitive issues such as stem cells or GMO exercized a bad influence on public attitude to science, which in turn indicated an untrustworthy image of science itself. Because of the ’blame the messenger’ attitude, science journalists are whippingboys most of the times. In addition, there is a growing gap between science and its general level of understanding that is perhaps the biggest challenge for science journalism. Reading habits of news consumers have changed: nowadays, the two main sources of news are the television and the internet; newsreaders pay attention for the headline and the lead only; usually they don’t spend much time with one piece of news; special knowledge requirements are limited, and scientific information is supposed to be provided for the public in ways that relate to their specific interests and concerns. In addition, citizens are empowered by new technology – they themselves are able to gather information, distribute content and report breaking news faster and less expensively than traditional communication specialists and mainstream news organizations. Because of these tendencies and the global financial crises, the media companies have been forced to adopt cost-saving measures. Consequently, US newspapers with weekly science sections dropped from 95 in 1989 to 19 in 2012, specialized editorial departments were closed down and replaced by centralized editorial offices delivering theme pages like health, automobile, or IT to all regional newspapers; media content has become shallower, more entertainment-centred, increasingly isolationist, more prone to political and business influences, and lacking in investigative bite including less science news. Public Relations is gaining importance and PR products have replaced journalistic products without being sufficiently identified as PR. To handle this crisis and succeed, communication experts have to reinvent their business models; build consumer relationships across multiple platforms; manage a mix of monetization models across advertising, subscriptions and create sources for investigative and independent science journalism. References [1] Scheufele D. A. and Tewksbury D. (2007). Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication 57(1): 9–20. [2] Bucchi M. (1998): Science and the Media: Alternative Routes to Scientific Communications, Routledge [3] Special Eurobarometer (2005). Europeans, Science and Technology. European Commission - Directorate-General for Research. [4] Special Eurobarometer (2007). Scientific Research in the Media. European Commission Directorate-General for Research. [5] Special Eurobarometer (2013). Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), Science and Technology. European Commission - Directorate-General for Research. [6] The Web at 25 (2014). Pew Research Center. [7] Amid Criticism, Support for Media’s ‘Watchdog’ Role Stands Out (2013). Pew Research Center. [8] Internet Users in Europe June 30, 2014 (2014). Internet World Stats. Miniwatts Marketing Group. [9] Digital Set to Surpass TV in Time Spent with US Media. Mobile helps propel digital time spent (2013). Emarketer.com

[10] Jenkins, Henry (2004). The Cultural Logic of Media Convergence. International Journal of Cultural Studies. [11] Gregory J. and Miller S. (1998). Science in Public: Communication, Culture, and Credibility. Plenum Trade. [12] Salovaara-Moring I. (2012). Digital (R)evolutions? Internet, New Media and Informed Citizenship in Central and Eastern Europe. In: Peter Gross, Karol Jakubowicz (edited): Media Transformations in the Post-Communist World : Eastern Europe's Tortured Path to Change. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. [13] The State of the News Media 2012. (2012.) Pew Research Center. An annual report on American journalism. [14] Top 15 Most Popular News Website, December 2014 (2014). eBizMBA Rank. [15] Carpenter S (2010) A study of content diversity in online citizen journalism and online newspaper articles. New Media & Society 12: 1064–1084. [16] Lammers, John C. (2011). How Institutions Communicate: Institutional Messages, Institutional Logics, and Organizational Communication. In: Management Communication Quarterly, February 2011 25: 154-182. [17] van Noorden, Richard. (2014). Scientists and the social network. Nature 512: 129. http://www.nature.com/polopoly_fs/1.15711!/menu/main/topColumns/topLeftColumn/pd f/512126a.pdf [18] Chahine, Gabriel and Thomas Künstner and Christopher Vollmer. (2008). Game Not Over: How the Media and Entertainment Industry Can Survive the Downturn. Booz & Company. [19] Gauchat, Gordon. (2012). Politicization of Science in the Public Sphere - A Study of Public Trust in the United States, 1974 to 2010. American Sociological Review, April, 2012, Vol. 77, No. 2, 167-187. doi: 10.1177/0003122412438225. [20] Corwin, Scott and Matthew Egol, Harry Hawkes, Jeffrey Tucker, Gregor Vogelsang, Christopher Vollmer. (2009). Media Industry Perspectives for 2010: U.S. and Europe. Booz & Company. [21] Göpfert, Winfried. (2008). The strength of PR and the weakness of science journalism. In:Martin W. Bauer, Massimiano Bucchi (edited): Journalism, Science and Society. Sage. [22] Allen, Kevin. (2013). Yahoo list says PR specialists will replace reporters. PR Daily. http://www.prdaily.com/Main/Articles/Yahoo_list_says_PR_specialists_will_replace_rep ort_15746.aspx [23] CareerCast. (2013). Jobs Rated 2013: Ranking 200 Jobs From Best To Worst. CareerCast. http://www.careercast.com/jobs-rated/best-worst-jobs-2013 [24] Baerns, B. (1990). Wissenscahftsjournalismus und Öffentlichkeitsarbeit: Zur Informationsleistung der Pressedienste und Agenturen. In: Ru ß –Mohl, Stephan (Hrsg.): Wissenscahftsjournalismus und Öffentlichkeitsarbeit. Gerlingen. 37-54. [25] Vermij, Peter. (2013). Survey: science journalism and other hats. 8th Word Conference of Science Journalists. [26] http://wcsj2013.org/wearing-hats-preserve-independence/ [27] https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1Lzr3L6IOnPo0_NXE2yTdncQPlU2TzxUZ_T220fCYs Ac/viewform?formkey=dGJGZU9YMWN0dktFT3FTOGdnLXRGWnc6MA#gid=0