Over the past few years, I have definitely noticed a trend towards politicizing science. The intelligent design debate, stem cells, and climate change have all become political issues.

In the journal Science a few weeks back, communication professor Matt Nisbet argues that scientists need to start framing their arguments. Framing so the public better understands the issue. Framing to pare down the technical, make it more accessible.

It’s an interesting argument, placing more communication responsibility on the scientist. My cafe series is intended to give science a frame, without the responsibility solely falling to the researcher. My frame is “a dialogue on science of local impact”. It’s a frame intended to start debate and relate the importance of research to all of us.

I am concerned with laying that responsibility solely upon scientists. Framing is great for communication, but there is a fine line between framing and spin. Scientific integrity is tantamount to public trust, will framing degrade that trust? It also takes incredible organization and dedication to maintain a frame, I doubt the science community can pull that off.

Definitely an interesting article, especially heading into my first event.

You can also check out On the Media’s interview with Matt Nisbet