Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Sensationalism in Science - Coggle Diagram
Sensationalism in Science
What kind of solutions?
Community based
Journalists
Try to enforce a code of ethics? If you enfore a code of ethics and then have the article or news story pass through several people before it gets out into the world, it might be less likely to be approved if it is sensationalist or misinformation?
Find a way for journalists to be competitive with each other in the current system that works just as well as or better than sensationalism
Will be difficult as you will probably need to change the entire business model as you are unlikely to find a way to incentivize not attraction your audience's attention (through sensationalism at least)
Scientists/the scientific community
Try to have stricter rules about what sorts of studies may be published especially regarding conflicts of interest as well as chasing sensationalist results?
Maybe have studies not be published as "studies" if they have not passed a threshold of peer review?
Audience/readers/the general public
informing and better educating the general public so that they are a little more critical when reading articles and learn to not just blindly accept everything news outlets tell them as fact.
Might be somewhat difficult to approach it from this way since if we try to put too much skepticism into the way they see news, it might have a negative effect where they don't trust anything and turn to more extreme views
Regulatory?
I don't really think that this is a good option though, because restricting word choice? is going to be pretty difficult especially as it is going to be seen as an infringement on free speech
Actually, we could do something like restrictions on publishing false or deliberately misleading things? maybe? it might still have the above problem though.
Stakeholders
Most affected: audience/general public
empowered to fix the situation: section editors, news directors, editors in chief; research institutions
Solutions
Science literacy? or informational literacy?
regulation of the publishing of sensationalized studies? (like purposeful misinformation?
Change to the structure and framework of news outlets and research institutes?
Pew Research Center (think tank)
Solution: funding and support must be directed to the restoration of a well-fortified, ethical and trusted public press and elevate information literacy (must become a primary goal at all levels of education)
I think that the combination of these two tactics are not a bad solution (in general)
However, it is exactly that: general. Its a bit too vague to call a plan
Some issues I have with it are: who will be paying to purposefully support these news stations and how will that change and fit into the current model of news outlets?
Issue: how is this going to be implemented into education and schooling? Will this cost extra money and funding in order to add to the educational curriculum?
This is an unfortunately broader source tackling misinformation, so it does not speak about science journalism specifically, but how will this system really deal with the real, primary sources of the misinformation/sensationalism? If you only change the journalists, how will you change the biases that slip through from scientists and research institutions?