Abstract

Science journalists translate technical topics filled with nuance and uncertainty for consumption by a general audience while trying to meet demands for newsworthiness, simplicity, and brevity. Moreover, covering research credibility and scientific reform carries risks of undercutting public trust in science if the context of how research is done gets lost. How do science journalists wrestle with the competing demands of respecting and representing complexity and uncertainty and helping the audience learn something interesting and useful? And, what are the risks and opportunities for communicating about the need and challenges for scientific reform to engage and not alienate the funding public?