Abstract
In the contributions to the Yearbook volume “The Sciences Media Connection”, resonances of the medialization of science are described and interpreted within different conceptual and theoretical frameworks. All point to the same question: What happens to science as a social institution responsible for the production of reliable knowledge under the influence of the mass media? This concluding chapter presents an overview of the individual chapters focusing on the risks and benefits of the extension of science’s publics. From the range of analyses assembled here two principal conclusions emerge: On the one hand, the hopes attached to science communication having a “democratizing effect” are mostly disappointed. On the other hand, fears that orientation to the media and their logic of selection and representation will compromise the production of reliable knowledge are also likely to be exaggerated.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Brunsson, N. (1989). The organization of hypocrisy. Talk, decisions and actions in organizations. Chichester: Wiley.
Franzen, M. (2011). Breaking news: Wissenschaftliche Zeitschriften im Kampf um Aufmerksamkeit. Reihe Wissenschafts- und Technikforschung. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Funtowicz, S. O. and J. R. Ravetz (1993). The emergence of post-normal science. In R. V. Schomberg (ed.), Science, politics and morality: Scientific uncertainty and decision making. Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 85–123.
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday Anchor.
Jasanoff, S. (2003). Technologies of humility: Citizen participation in governing science. Minerva, 41, 223–244.
Joss, S. and J. Durant (eds.) (1995). Public participation in science. Consensus conferences in Europe. London: Science Museum.
Lewenstein, B. (1995) Science and the media. In S. Jasanoff et al. (eds.), Handbook of science and technology studies. Thousand Oaks: Sage, pp. 343–360.
Nowotny, H., P. Scott, and M. Gibbons (2001). Re-thinking science. Knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Rödder, S. and M. S. Schäfer (2010). Repercussion and resistance: An empirical study on the interrelation between science and mass media. Communications, 35, 249–267.
Schäfer, M. S. (2010). Taking stock: A meta-analysis of studies on the media’s coverage of science. Public Understanding of Science. Published online before print December 1, 2010, doi: 10.1177/0963662510387559.
Shinn, T. and R. Whitley (1985). Expository science: Forms and functions of popularisation. Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook IX. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Weingart, P. (2001). Die Stunde der Wahrheit? Zum Verhältnis der Wissenschaft zu Politik, Wirtschaft und den Medien in der Wissensgesellschaft. Weilerswist: Velbrück Wissenschaft.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Weingart, P., Rödder, S., Franzen, M. (2012). Dimensions of Medialization. Concluding Remarks. In: Rödder, S., Franzen, M., Weingart, P. (eds) The Sciences’ Media Connection –Public Communication and its Repercussions. Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook, vol 28. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2085-5_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2085-5_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-2084-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-2085-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)