We are at multiple global disaster tipping points – science communications must step up

It’s fair to say that things aren’t looking too good for us.

Yet the public discourse remains the same: at best optimistic, at worst dangerously complacent. Whether it’s climate change or global pandemics, we cling to the belief that lab coats will save us.

Wearing these lab coats are, of course, many of society’s unsung heroes: scientists, experts, and the ecosystems that surround them. We look up to them as our saving grace, as they work tirelessly to conjure up solutions, innovations, and technology that can help us avoid all of these impending catastrophes we hear about in the news.

But this faith masks a deeper problem: the lack of effective communication within the scientific community leaves many unable to understand the importance of scientific endeavors, limiting meaningful public engagement and support.

What Covid-19 and ChatGPT have taught us about scientific communications

There’s no better example of these risks than during the Covid-19 pandemic. While many of us struggled with our virtual Zoom quizzes, virologists, biochemists and immunologists (among others) were scrambling to conjure up vaccines. They succeeded, freeing us from the comfort of our homes and saving an estimated 14.4 million people in 185 countries. That’s the equivalent of the entire populations of Croatia and Portugal combined.

All of this has happened behind closed doors. Many of us have no idea what goes on behind the scenes to deliver revelations like vaccines.

Recent history is full of innovations and technologies that have seemingly come out of nowhere and put us all at a disadvantage. Artificial intelligence (AI) is just the latest. After its launch, AI chatbot ChatGPT reached one million users in five days. Tech giants called it a “Pearl Harbor moment” due to the panic and upheaval it caused in the corporate world. AI has been on an unstoppable march since its boom in the early 2020s, despite its strong links to misinformation, job losses and displacement, criminal use and cyberattacks, and even war.

It’s no wonder that in the UK three times as many people believe that innovation is poorly managed as well managed (a trend that is consistent across 24 countries). To make matters worse, when people believe that innovation is poorly managed, they are also more likely to say the following: (1) technology and society are changing too fast, (2) the system is biased in favor of the rich, and (3) capitalism does more harm than good in the world.

To avert these multiple looming global disasters, we need to enact a societal shift: a change in the narrative around science and technology from apathy to enthusiasm. Why? Because we need to generate the necessary public support — a shift that has taken the climate change movement far too long to address.

But the state of science communication is currently mired in complexity, jargon, and indifference. Organizations in this space excel at their research, but struggle to translate their findings into language that resonates and connects with the public. As a result, public understanding and behavior fall short of what we truly need to effectively mitigate the impending disaster.

What the world needs is to bring innovation out from behind closed doors.

What’s the solution?

The answer lies with the scientists themselves.

Because scientists are uniquely positioned to change the narrative. They rank as the most trusted group of people to inform you about new innovations, It is to lead its implementation. And when the general public knows that innovation is being evaluated by scientists, acceptance of it increases by an average of 49.6% – including around topics like AI and green energy.

Simply put, when the public sees scientists giving a thumbs up for something, they give it a thumbs up too.

Yet communicating topics like AI and green energy is easier said than done – particularly for the scientific community. According to the same survey above, nearly half of people believe that scientists don’t know how to communicate with ‘people like them’. Our own research at Radley Yeldar shows that companies around them are plagued by communication issues, such as a superficial tone of voice, stock imagery and language that talks past their audience.

So the worlds of science and technology need a helping hand to break out of the ivory tower and appeal to the masses.

When we analyzed the communications efforts of companies in the science, technology and engineering sectors and spoke with communications leaders who are struggling to generate public engagement, we came up with seven guiding principles that will breathe new life into science communications, enabling them to captivate their audiences.

Science organizations have the power to transform public perception, drive global change, and lead us boldly into a future where innovation triumphs over catastrophe – but only if they learn to communicate.