Online from publishing organization, by membership. 2 pages., Newsletter issue features the career of ACE member Dr. Erica Irlbeck, an agricultural communications teacher and researcher at Texas Tech University.
20 pages., Mass media is the main source of scientific information for most Americans, but inaccuracy of reporting has threatened the public’s understanding of science. Perceived media bias and fake news has also made the public skeptical of the media, and scientists’ perceptions are no different. Because scientists are the most trusted source for scientific information in America, it is important they remain willing to work with the media. This study used the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) to explore scientists’ perceptions of working with reporters, including their attitude, subjective norms, behavioral control, and intent to engage with the media in the future. In-depth interviews were conducted with 13 tenure-track faculty at the University of Florida’s Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (UF/IFAS) in spring 2018. These participants represented low, moderate, and high communicators. The findings from this study indicated mostly negative attitudes toward reporters due to skepticism in their ability to accurately report science. Behavioral control was also limited due to time and ability constraints, but participants recommended trainings as ways to increase behavioral control. Subjective norms were somewhat mixed, with some positive norms from mentors but perceived negative norms from the public. Despite negative attitudes toward reporters, intent to engage with the media was mixed. However, subjective norms and behavioral control were often discussed as reasons to not engage with reporters. The findings from this study offered recommendations for both practice and research to help foster positive relationships between scientists and reporters.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 202 Document Number: D12108
Notes:
Online from Radio Free. 3 pages., Author reports on helping the U.S. Senate draft and pass the Physician Payments Sunshine Act a decade ago. It requires companies to report monies and gifts they give physicians, which are known to influence what doctors prescribe or promote. "We need a 'sunshine law' for science that would expose all sorts of conflicts of interest and industry manipulation that skew research on food, synthetical chemicals, pesticides, air pollution, genetic technology, and the climate."