Time constraints in publishing content. Tendency to cut the complexity of scientific posts
- selection: of the most interesting/impacting content
- simplification
- narrative construction: need to catch the attention of the reader
Fields that are more covered in mainstream media (in order):
- health and medicine
- environmental and climate
- space and astronomy
- technology and digital
- archaeology and paleontology
Even science journalists do not have necessarily a scientific background
News need controversial and fuzzy material more than it needs right and correct content
Scientific topics are rarely covered solely to share new scientific information. Often, they are framed through political, economical, cultural perspectives to attract readers
Using of
- clickbait title
- oversimplification
- sensationalisms
- editorial constraints
Problematic trends in science coverage:
- science as a (forced) debate
- false equivalence (comparing the opinion of a professor to fringe voices)
- lack of corrections: news outlets rarely update or correct inaccurate scientific reporting
The future:
- declining resources: fewer specialized science journalists
- lower standard
- AI creating content
- anti-science trends
Q.
- Does having low quality scientific news/fake news damage the news brand?
- Can misreporting scientific discovery damage the credibility of the scientists involved in the discovery?
- What about scientific references?