image: Arko Olesk
Credit: Reigo Pajula
"Researchers who are driven by a more strategic goal are usually able to be more visible in the media and to guide coverage in the direction that suits them,” explains Arko Olesk, whose doctoral thesis is titled "The mediatization of researchers: process, indicators, impact”.
"One can see similarities between media communication of scientists and the processes taking place in evolution,” Olesk adds. “A researcher has to adapt in order to successfully get their message across in the media. If they are primarily interested in explaining their subject in a comprehensible way, they need different skills and techniques than if their aim is to guide a public debate. Just as species adapt to their ecological niche, scientists adapt to the media niche they wish to inhabit."
"In my work, I outline five dimensions for assessing such adaptations," explains Olesk. These include an understanding of media logic and the ability to use it to your advantage. "For a researcher who wants to present their work, it's enough to adapt to journalists' expectations to respond quickly and to explain topics simply and interestingly. However, researchers with a more strategic aim need to be able to bring issues to the press themselves, by contacting journalists and offering ideas in a way that is attractive for them.”
The work builds on, among other things, the experience of the research group that launched Estonia's first satellite, ESTCube-1. "Studying their interactions with the media allowed us to see how researchers learn the written and unwritten rules of the media, and to understand how different objectives shape patterns in media communication," notes Olesk.
The scientific literature on media relations of scientists has pointed out that if researchers become overly concerned with media visibility, the scientific quality of their work can suffer. "No similar effects were apparent from this study,” says Olesk. “But while there is a lot of talk about the need for researchers to do more public outreach, we need to be aware of the threats this can pose to the quality of media coverage of science.”
The paper also identifies the weakening of the position of the press as a potential threat. "As scientists get better and better at 'selling' their ideas, and journalists don't have the time or desire to dig deeper, it's easy for scientists to get the media coverage they want," Olesk describes. "As long as a scientist's motives are noble, nothing bad may happen, but it is easy to overblow scientific results or spread questionable claims by exploiting journalists' trust in scientists. Societies will therefore continue to need critical science journalism."
"We can see that the media communication patterns of researchers can also be judged by the beneficial or detrimental impact they have on science in general, researchers themselves, the public or journalists,” says Olesk. “There are patterns that lead to problems, but there are also patterns where everyone benefits. It is precisely the skills needed to maintain and create such patterns that we need to pay more attention to when training researchers and journalists."
The defence of Arko Oleski's doctoral thesis took place on 18 September. Thesis supervisors were Barbi Pilvre and Anastassia Zabrodskaya, and the opponents Ragne Kõuts-Klemm from the University of Tartu and Mike Schäfer from the University of Zurich. The full text of the paper is available here: https://www.etera.ee/zoom/202230/view
Subject of Research
People