Abstract
PurposeThis paper looks at science communication through an organisational lens with the aim of assessing the relevance of different organisational forms for science communication.Design/methodology/approachThe paper explores science communication in different organisational forms. Based on conceptual considerations and by reviewing existing empirical literature, the paper selects and compares three organisational forms of science communication: the editorial office of a daily newspaper, the press office of a university and the Science Media Centre.FindingsThe paper shows the relevance of organisation for science communication by comparing three organisational forms. The first two, the science news desk and the press office, have the character of a sub-system of an organisation, while the third, the Science Media Centre, forms its own organisation. The paper shows how the respective set-up shapes science-media contacts with a focus on the occurrence and resolution of conflicts.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper proposes a conceptual framework for studying science communication through an organisational lens but leaves comparative empirical studies of all types to future research. Yet, it outlines and compares implications of the formal organisation of science communication from a conceptual point of view.Practical implicationsThe findings provide information on the structural impact of different organisational forms on science communication and point to where conflicting expectations, and thus potential conflicts, are most likely to occur in each case. A reflection of structurally conflicting expectations and how they can be overcome in specific situations is of high practical value for all science communication activities.Originality/valueOrganisational theorists have long argued that organisations are the key to understanding society. Despite their undoubted relevance, however, organisations and their influence on science communication have so far been much less analysed – both conceptually and empirically – than its contents, its practices and its impacts on public understanding, public policy, and on science and scientists. The paper contributes to the emerging field with conceptual considerations towards an organisational sociology of science communication.
Subject
Strategy and Management,Communication
Reference108 articles.
1. Antos, G. and Gogolok, K. (2006), “Mediale Inszenierung wissenschaftlicher Kontroversen im Wandel”, in Liebert, W.-A. and Weitze, M.-D. (Eds), Kontroversen als Schlüssel zur Wissenschaft? Wissenskulturen in sprachlicher Interaktion, transcript, Bielefeld, pp. 113-127.
2. Appel, A.J. and Jazbinsek, D. (2000), ““Der Gen-Sieg über den Krebs?” Über die Akkuratheit der Berichte zu den ersten Gentherapie-Versuchen in Deutschland”, in Jazbinsek, D. (Ed.), Gesundheitskommunikation, Westdeutscher Verlag, Wiesbaden, pp. 184-228.
3. Archut, A. (2008), “Flaschenpost vom Professor. Hochschulkommunikation im Nachrichtenmeer”, in Hermanstädter, A., Sonnabend, M. and Weber, C. (Eds), Wissenschaft kommunizieren, Die Rolle der Universitäten, Edition Stifterverband, Essen, pp. 26-29.
4. Badenschier, F. and Wormer, H. (2012), “Issue selection in science journalism: towards a special theory of news values for science news?”, in Rödder, S., Franzen, M. and Weingart, P. (Eds), The Sciences' Media Connection - Public Communication and its Repercussions. Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook, Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 59-85.
Cited by
19 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献