Advertisement

WHAT DOES THE NEW CLIMATE FOR DIALOGUE AND DEBATE MEAN FOR COMMUNICATING ASTRONOMY?

  • STEVE MILLER
Chapter
Part of the ASTROPHYSICS AND SPACE SCIENCE LIBRARY book series (ASSL, volume 343)

Abstract

Astronomy appears to receive a great deal of public interest. Until now, its portrayal in the media has been generally positive. But the climate for science communication has changed from one of one-way communication of the facts, to a more interactive two-way dialogue. This poses challenges for astronomy and space science and its interaction with ordinary citizens. Scientists in these areas will have to be trained to respond to those challenges.

Keywords

Ordinary Citizen Fellow Citizen Cold Fusion British Broadcasting Corporation Martian Meteorite 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Beck, U. 1986, Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity, Sage, London.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bucchi, M. 1998, Science and the Media: Alternative Routes to Scientific Communications, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bucchi, M. & Mazzolini, R.G. 2003, Big Science, Little News: Coverage in the Italian Daily Press, 1946–1997, Pub. Understand. Sci. 12, 7–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Christidou, V., Dimopoulos, K. & Koulaidis, V. 2004, Constructing Social Representations of Science and Technology: The role of Metaphors in the Press and Popular Science Magazines, Pub. Understand. Sci. 13, 347–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Clemens, E. 1985, Of Asteroids and Dinosaurs, Soc. Stud. Sci. 16, 421–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Close, F. 1992, Too Hot to Handle: The Race for Cold Fusion, Princeton Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Einseidel, E.F. 1992, Framing Science and Technology in the Canadian Press, Pub. Understand. Sci. 1, 89–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    European Union 2001, Science and Society Action Plan, Comm. European Community, Brussels.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    European Union 2005, Eurobarometer 224: Europeans, Science and Technology, Comm. European Community, Brussels.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gopfert, W. 1996, Scheduled Science: TV Coverage of Science, Technology, Medicine and Social Science and Programming Policies in Britain and Germany, Pub. Understand. Sci. 5, 361–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Greenberg, J.M. 2004, Creating the “Pillars”: Multiple Meanings of a Hubble Image, Pub. Understand. Sci. 13, 83–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gregory, J. 2005, Fred Hoyle’s Universe, Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gregory, J. & Miller, S. 1998, Science in Public: Communication, Culture and Credibility, Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hilgartner, S. 1990, The Dominant View of Popularisation: Conceptual Problems, Political Uses, Soc. Stud. Sci. 20, 519–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jergovic, B., Kehar, A. & Miller, S. 2006, A Tale of Two Missions: UK Press Reporting of Beagle 2 and Cassini-Huygens, Proc. PCST-9 Congress, PCST, Seoul.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    House of Lords 2000, Science and Society, Houses of Parliament, London.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kiernan, V. 2000, The Mars Meteorite: A Case Study of Controls on Dissemination of Science News, Pub. Understand. Sci. 9, 15–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lewenstein, B.V. 1995, From Fax to Facts: Communication in the Cold Fusion Story, Soc. Stud. Sci. 25, 403–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Miller, S. 1994, Wrinkles, Ripples and Fireballs: Cosmology on the Front Page, Pub. Understand. Sci. 3, 445–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nelkin, D. 1987, Selling Science: How the Press Covers Science and Technology, W.H. Freeman, New York.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Valenti, J.A.M. 2002, Communication Challenges for Science and Religion, Pub. Understand. Sci. 11, 57–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Weingart P., Muhl, C. & Pansegrau, P. 2003, Of Power Maniacs and Unethical Geniuses. Science and Scientists in Fiction Film, Pub. Understand. Sci. 12, 279–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • STEVE MILLER
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Science and Technology Studies, Physics and AstronomyUniversity College London GowerLondonU.K.

Personalised recommendations