Abstract
Scientists often complain, that journalists do not describe the “real” scientific work, but rather present an exaggerated—often alarmistic—negative image of science. But the contrary is also true: There is a tendency in the press to report about science in a very positive, even ecstatic way. In fact, there are two types of exaggeration: Scientists are either described as heroic figures, that bring “God’s formula” down to earth. Or they are portrayed as some form of fallen angel, whose science has turned into something evil and frightening—which is the devil’s contribution to the story of scientific glory. But this is not a unique feature of science-journalism; popular articles often carry an emotional message to attract attention. While politicians know (and use) this knowledge for a long time, it seems especially hard for scientists to accept it. But in order to make Public Understanding of Science successful, scientists should try to understand the laws and mechanisms of journalism. Recommendations as the Guidelines of the Royal Society can be helpful.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.