I had the great opportunity to attend this year's
Science Online 2014 conference in Raleigh, NC! The conference had a fun and friendly crowd of attendees, thought provoking sessions, tasty (and healthy) catered meals and an outside the box conference style that evoked memories of late night discussions at summer camp pondering the meaning of life more so than your typical rigidly structured scientific conference.
While I have to admit, a bit more structure and preparation for each session might have made discussions more productive, it was nice to be in the company of like-minded communication professionals. One concern that we all seemed to share and that emerged in nearly every session, regardless of topic, was how to better engage the public. How to get average audiences interested in science. Attendees and moderators alike wrestled with this throughout the conference. And while a few sessions made strides to address this - one session suggested the use of social psychology, it was clear that science communicators are like babes in the woods struggling to get their messages heard.
For me, an avid student of social marketing and educational entertainment for many years, this was surprising. These content producers were groping and stumbling through the woods, when the tools - the edible nuts and berries and well worn paths - were all around them and had been in existence for decades. The moderators introduced us to theories and models of social psychology as if applying them to communications was an untested and novel approach. Meanwhile, Edward Bernays had introduced psychology and pschoanalysis to advertising over 80 years ago, citing persuasion as a necessary tool to curb the irrational "herd mentality" to which society was instinctually inclined.
To anyone who hasn't seen
Century of the Self, about the evolution of advertising and public relations and it's use of social psychology, I highly recommend it as a crash course. While conference attendees were debating the ethical implications of persuading the public to value science, the concept of public persuasion already exists and has been used for worse things. My humble advice - get over it and get on with it, the anti-science camp is and has been using it in full force for years.
In truth, I found it somewhat ironic that these fields are so unknown, even to those who would most greatly benefit from their use. It appears that social marketing and educational entertainment, two fields that focus on using outreach, media campaigns and narrative storytelling to raise awareness about health and social issues are in need of a campaign themselves - to raise awareness to science writers that they exist and that they are perfectly ethical to use! Sheesh and good grief!
One take-away from the conference that I'll admit to, which may seem obvious to most... The inclusion of twitter handles on our badges in lieu of business cards was revolutionary to me, attendees tweeted constantly during the sessions, summarizing what they heard, resulting in tweets that I later used for an office presentation. So now... nearly 7 or 8 years after learning about it at a communications conference at American University and rolling my eyes, I think I may finally get Twitter.
