Advertisement

Dimensions of Medialization. Concluding Remarks

  • Peter WeingartEmail author
  • Simone Rödder
  • Martina Franzen
Chapter
Part of the Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook book series (SOSC, volume 28)

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.

Keywords

Mass Medium Knowledge Production News Coverage Media Visibility Reliable Knowledge 
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.

References

  1. Brunsson, N. (1989). The organization of hypocrisy. Talk, decisions and actions in organizations. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  2. Franzen, M. (2011). Breaking news: Wissenschaftliche Zeitschriften im Kampf um Aufmerksamkeit. Reihe Wissenschafts- und Technikforschung. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  3. 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.Google Scholar
  4. Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday Anchor.Google Scholar
  5. Jasanoff, S. (2003). Technologies of humility: Citizen participation in governing science. Minerva, 41, 223–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Joss, S. and J. Durant (eds.) (1995). Public participation in science. Consensus conferences in Europe. London: Science Museum.Google Scholar
  7. 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.Google Scholar
  8. 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.Google Scholar
  9. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 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.Google Scholar
  11. Shinn, T. and R. Whitley (1985). Expository science: Forms and functions of popularisation. Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook IX. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Weingart, P. (2001). Die Stunde der Wahrheit? Zum Verhältnis der Wissenschaft zu Politik, Wirtschaft und den Medien in der Wissensgesellschaft. Weilerswist: Velbrück Wissenschaft.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Weingart
    • 1
    Email author
  • Simone Rödder
    • 2
  • Martina Franzen
    • 2
  1. 1.Bielefeld University
  2. 2.Institute for Science and Technology Studies (IWT), Bielefeld UniversityBielefeldGermany

Personalised recommendations