Every week, the Science Media Centre Spain team reads hundreds of headlines and news alerts for potential news to cover. Our specialty is to generate useful content on science topics that ignite public debate; therefore, we take great care in the selection of stories and spend a good proportion of our time debating what we should and should not give. To end the year, we wanted to tell you part of our intrahistory.
Behind any study that hits the media with eye-catching headlines there are usually numbers to back it up. Analysing the statistics of a study is one of the greatest challenges in communicating any finding with rigour.
The Ibero-American Day of Science takes place on 28 November; it was launched last year during a meeting of science ministers within the framework of the Ibero-American Summit. On this occasion, we have compiled below several guides and databases maintained by universities, research centres and other science organisations that aim to help journalists in search of expert sources. Of course, this list is not comprehensive; if you have suggestions for other guides and sources—whether from Spain, Portugal or Latin America—that we could add, please don't hesitate to contact us so that we can continue to expand this resource.
We often see the term 'vaccine' used in the media to refer to drugs that target diseases that are not even infectious, such as cancer and cholesterol. In this article we explain when it is correct to talk about vaccines and when it would be wrong.
A research project has analysed the Twitter discourse related to deepfakes in the context of the Russia-Ukraine war in 2022, studying almost 5,000 tweets related to these videos. Deepfakes are synthetic media that mix an original video with content generated by artificial intelligence, often with the aim of mimicking a person. The research, published in PLoS ONE, looks at the lack of literacy about deepfakes and the scepticism and misinformation that can arise when real media is mistakenly identified as fake. The authors warn that efforts to raise public awareness of this phenomenon can undermine trust in other legitimate media, that can also be seen as suspect.
Floods in Libya and Greece, fires in Australia or earthquakes in Morocco. Disasters are on the rise, partly because climate change is affecting the frequency and intensity of some of them. The media often use the term 'natural disaster' to describe them, something a team of crisis and disaster specialists is trying to change.
The survey Scientific Disinformation in Spain, carried out by FECYT in the framework of the European project IBERIFIER, shows that most citizens are concerned about the effects of scientific disinformation and that they do not feel very confident when it comes to differentiating between false and true content. The report includes a series of recommendations for dealing with this type of misinformation, which are reproduced below.
The publications in which scientific results are made public, known as papers in the jargon, are sometimes newsworthy, that is, what they report can be narrated to a wider - non-scientific - audience as journalistic news. But in the paper-news transition the message is formatted very differently.
A journalistic article follows an inverted pyramid structure in which the most important things are at the beginning. A paper does not present its results and conclusions until the end. This is a suggested reading order, depending on the level of depth we want to reach.
Scientific studies are regularly published in various scientific journals. Science journalists who have contacted the journal and registered have prior access to them under an embargo that they undertake to respect. This is an advantageous system, but it is not without its critics.