Why the debate? Media coverage of climate change.
Why the debate? Media coverage of climate change. make a blog about one or more talking points raised in the videos. At least one paragraph ( about 400 words). (attached is the video)
Sorry I didn’t know what type of order is this & where to classified it that why I choose healthcare, this is not essay task you only need to write a discussion and blog as I mentioned above
Below is example ( different topic ) in how you should do this order.
Topic : Scientific method and the media (discussion)
The scientific method is a very complex way of making sense of the things that happen around the world. There are many people involved in scientific studies and there are many steps as Dr Leonard and Dr Benson discussed in the videos. These steps take time to get through and are not straightforward. The scientific method poses problems for the media because the media simplifies the complexity of this method, OR rather the media poses a problem to the scientific method as it is the media that simplifies and omits information that is important to the scientific method and the overall outcome. There are a lot of aspects that the general public have been led to believe that are actually not true. For example, when it is mentioned that a scientific study is being conducted people without a background in science believe that one person is sitting in a lab with test tubes or that the scientific method is systematic and straightforward when in fact it is not this way at all. Although this misconception is probably the fault of the media but keep in mind their job is to get people to read their article, and who wants to read an article 2 pages long discussing the details of the experiment, the steps taken to conduct it and the limitations encountered? I acknowledge that it is a shame that the general public do not appreciate/understand the lengths that scientists go to in order to formulate and prove their hypotheses but I think that if you want to capture the attention of the general public articles need to be written in a certain way. And to capture the attention of scientists or academics articles need to be written in a way that is different to that.
Blogging:
Scientific method and the media
Science is a complex system of procedures and rules that ensure that the result can be deemed ‘scientific’. The extreme effort and measures that occur become somewhat daunting for people who are not trained in the area. This proves a problem when it comes to communicating scientific information to the wider public.
Dr Rob Morrison indicated such scientific complexity in his article ‘What is Science?’ In this piece examples of the misinterpretation of the language used by science were indicated and include an example of the word ‘theory’. The media and wider public have used this discrepancy in understanding to try and weaken the evidence that makes science theory what it is. Because of this inconsistency in language, science is unable to effectively communicate their message, while also having the significance inaccurately interpreted.
So, how can this discrepancy between science and media be mediated?
Methods and procedures that science goes through is a major factor in why media ineffectively communicate science. But, isn’t this a two way street. The media also has a set structure of rules and regulations that dictate their ability to produce an article. The grey area occurs because of the time frames each industry has to produce their product.
The media must stay at the forefront of information and events with one person covering many different news worthy stories. While a scientist has a longer time frame in which to understand a topic/hypothesis and also to undertake experiments. To get two industries that are moving at different paces in two different directions to actively communicate to reach a desired goal is a very hard task.
One proposed ideas is to have dedicated science journalists. This would eliminate the confusion with the language used and the methods of science, but science is such a broad field. For example, while I understand the principles of science methods and procedures I have a greater knowledge in biology and chemistry, but if you asked me to explain a new finding from the physics field I would have no idea. This unfortunately is the reason why a dedicate science journalist would not mediate the current problem.
What if someone who wasn’t the media, but trained in science was able to act as the middle-man to help science communicate their findings and the media to understand/communicate the information to the right audience? Within the agriculture industry this already occurs with the likes of government departments (DEPI) and private companies/Agronomists who take the evidence generated by the scientists and identify how to apply this to practice. Although this example does not directly involve the media, the use of mass communication can be used by these organisations in order to correspond with their target audiences.
The grey area between science and the media is complex with many different factors affecting the miscommunication between the two industries. The methods and procedures the two industries go through are vastly different, thus having a major influence on the ability to communicate effectively. These differences need to be understood if an efficient line of communication is to be formed.
