Science communication for the twenty-first century

Members of the public, although generally supportive of science and scientists, have in recent years increasingly opposed particular developments involving science. The poor handling of controversies by scientists, businesses and politicians and the fact that new technologies often pose social or ethical dilemmas can exacerbate such opposition. Debates such as those surrounding bovine spongiform encephalitis (BSE), the mumps, measles and rubella vaccine and genetically modified organisms (GMOs), which would not have occurred 30 years ago, now take place because of the public’ s increasing suspicion of authority. Lack of trust often arises when controversial issues, and particularly presentations of risk, are badly presented by scientists, businesses and politicians. An uncertain level of risk presented as a certainty can undermine the credibility of scientists and their institutions, Agriculture Minister John Gummer force-feeding his daughter a beefburger during the BSE crisis offering us a good example. Whereas science and technology previously offered us cars and telephones with their obvious lifestyle advantages, new technologies raise increasingly difficult ethical and social dilemmas. These issues are often classed as ‘ non-scientific’ but are very much about science in the real world. The debate around GMOs provides a good example. Many people are not flatly hostile to GMOs, but are wary, ambivalent