Selling Science

NOV 01, 1990

When scientists attempt to use the press to promote their work, and science reporters rely more on imagery than on substance, the public winds up with an idealized and alienating view of the scientific enterprise.

DOI: 10.1063/1.881243

Dorothy Nelkin

In 1987, scientists at the spring meeting of The American Physical Society announced the development of new, hightemperature superconducting materials. The session, which had been widely publicized through early preprints and press releases, was attended by 3500 physicists and hundreds of reporters. Bertram Batlogg from the Bell Laboratories solid‐state research team proclaimed, “Our life has changed.” An ecstatic press headlined Batlogg’s comment, and underneath heralded “breathtaking advances,” “stunning possibilities” and “revolution.” Journalists reported “gasps” from scientists; high‐ $T_{c}$ superconductivity was “a quantum leap in technology,” a “new frontier.” News articles anticipated new transportation (levitated trains), new power systems (cheap energy) and the creation of an “Oxide Valley” comparable to California’s Silicon Valley.

References

1. D. Nelkin, Selling Science: How the Press Covers Science and Technology, Freeman, New York (1987).
Three other valuable studies of the relationship between scientists and journalists are S. Friedman, S. Dunwoody, C. Rogers, eds., Scientists and Journalists, Free P., New York (1986);
T. Shinn, R. Whitley, eds., Expository Science, Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands (1985);
and a historical study, M. LaFolette, Making Science Our Own, U. Chicago P., Chicago (1990).

More about the Authors

Dorothy Nelkin. University Professorship, New York University.