Social media and policy are both fields in which great promises provoke even greater fears. Every claim that the Web 2.0 is a voice for democratic levelling of hierarchies is countered by alarm over unwarranted governmental surveillance; with every use of social media for grassroots political change comes yet another revelation about the NSA. The moral ambiguity inherent in those situations isn't helped by the sheer information overload and multitude of 'experts' confronting new entrants to any debate.
What does all this mean for science? Despite its longstanding protocols of communication and hierarchies of expertise, and even though the World Wide Web is sort of its fault in the first place, science hasn't escaped these issues. Mark Henderson's bestselling The Geek Manifestodescribed in some detail the growing use of social media for science-based campaigns, but his prognosis has been seen by some analysts as overly optimistic. Further discussion of this topic on a solid, but broader, empirical basis was the intention of the first of the Guardian Political Science Events, held last month at University College London in association with the Science and Technology Studies Department.
The first speakers provided us with their accounts of two key events. Síle Lane, Director of Campaigns at Sense about Science, opened with the libel reform movement of 2009-2013. Here, social media was used initially to connect groups who shared concerns about the risks of defamation - writers and celebrities, as well as scientists - into an online voice for libel reform. Building on this, campaigners then used social media to disseminate pro-libel reform arguments, stories, and a petition. Síle's account was followed by Jenny Rohn, cell biologist and founder of Science is Vital. This group originated in 2010 with a blog post from Jenny in response to threatened science budget cuts. With only four weeks to act social media was essential to acquire rapid support for a petition and a 'No More Doctor Nice Guy' rally. But both speakers also noted the importance of offline activities, in particular letters to MPs (Sense About Science) and coverage in the mass media (Science Is Vital). Both campaigns ultimately achieved their aims (sort of), and set both organisations onto further use, and understanding, of social media.
The talks concluded with Jamie Bartlett, Director of the Centre for the Analysis of Social Media at Demos. Jamie contextualised the previous accounts within broader trends, in particular the great attention and trust internet information carries in contemporary debates. He noted the significant problem that online information is mostly passed around within closed networks with pre-existing shared beliefs, and that breaking out of these echo chambers can be best accomplished by expressing views in an extreme fashion - methods Jenny and Síle sometimes found distasteful, but nonetheless useful. Compounding this is a tightening relationship between social and traditional media; social media tends to react to mainstream media stories, but journalists and producers then draw heavily on social media discussion to guide reportage. Thus the traditional 'expert' is increasingly in competition with new notions of expertise, based on whose views are being heard and consulted. In this environment, number of qualifications can end up less significant than number of retweets.
The responses from Síle and Jenny, as well as the audience, to Jamie's talk suggested that many of the issues facing science-centred campaigns are familiar across social media usage more broadly. Concerns over how information can be effectively (and safely) shared and democratically used were the main thrust of the question session. Many asked about the future of social media, and how to make sure these tools are used according to long-term shared goals rather than facilitating fragmentation of groups. But these hit a problem implicit in all three talks: that social media usage is usually reactive, its benefits and challenges are learned alongside its usage, and often most effective in situations of unexpected and unplanned crisis. There was also the question of whether nuanced debate is ever possible on Twitter, which remained inconclusive.
The general lesson seems to be this: in the hyperconnected world of the internet, science policy is so related to other topics as to be largely inseparable from them; those Big Questions cannot be banished by a specific focus.Current science policy campaigns must fight against increasing 'petition fatigue': when social media makes campaigning easier, any single campaign risks getting lost in the noise, and science policy becomes yet another competitor for our attention.In the new attention and expertise economy, scientists must forge ever closer links with celebrity and journalism to get their message across - but with the opportunity of making direct, unmediated connections between scientists and new audiences if done well.Again, we come back to issues of promise and fears.However what emerged was that debates are not so much about weighing up opportunities and challenges, but rather navigating an ongoing chaos of information, democracy, and attention-seeking.What role science has to play in all this is, like much else, remains uncertain.
The event was organised and chaired by Oliver Marsh, a PhD student at UCL's department of Science and Technology Studies, with assistance from Jack Stilgoe, Melanie Smallman, and Simon Lock. A storify of the Tweets can be found at http://sfy.co/dkHx and audio of the event will hopefully be available soon. Entities 0 Name: Jenny Count: 3 1 Name: Jamie Count: 2 2 Name: Síle Count: 2 3 Name: Guardian Political Science Events Count: 1 4 Name: Melanie Smallman Count: 1 5 Name: Oliver Marsh Count: 1 6 Name: Simon Lock Count: 1 7 Name: NSA Count: 1 8 Name: Jenny Rohn Count: 1 9 Name: Analysis of Social Media at Demos Count: 1 10 Name: Jamie Bartlett Count: 1 11 Name: UCL 's department of Science and Technology Studies Count: 1 12 Name: Science and Technology Studies Department Count: 1 13 Name: University College London in association Count: 1 14 Name: Jack Stilgoe Count: 1 15 Name: Síle Lane Count: 1 16 Name: Mark Henderson Count: 1 Related 0 Url: http://ift.tt/1yGXCi5 Title: What to Know About Setting Up Healthcare Social Media | HealthWorks Collective Description: Marie Ennis-O'Connor Are you thinking of engaging with social media for your healthcare brand? Are you a health practitioner or marketer who has already started with social media but you are not seeing the results you had hoped for? This week's article will guide you through ten questions you should ask yourself before diving into social media waters.
Post a Comment for "The politics of science in social media"