Entomologists receive a new call to action in the fight against disinformation

Regardless of political leanings, it has been clear for many years that science, both in the United States and around the world, is waging what appears to be an uphill battle against disinformation.

With that predicament clearly clarified in 2024, science journalist and author Shawn Otto told scientists gathered at Entomology 2024 in Phoenix, Arizona, on Sunday that a crucial part of their job description is to push back the forces that oppose them Reason and objectivity judge.

“Science itself is never partisan, but it is always political,” Otto said. The author of books like his latest The war on science: who is waging it, why it matters, what we can do about itsays that any scientific finding will challenge a person’s worldview or economic interests. “As a scientist, you have to think about it. It is not partisan but there are political consequences because knowledge itself is power and power is political,” he said.

Otto addressed entomologists as the keynote speaker at the opening plenary session of the ESA Annual Meeting, opening the event with screens displaying the conference theme “Strengthening the Future with Insect Science.” He spent an hour giving participants a clear insight into the reasons behind the rise in disinformation. He pointed to fundamental social dynamics, looked back to the founding of the United States, and emphasized science as the original foundation of democracy.

“If anyone can discover the truth about something for himself through reason and science, then all men are created equal,” he said, paraphrasing Thomas Jefferson. “No king, no pope, no rich lord has more right to rule than any of us, than we the people.”

However, in today’s world, reason and science are often beyond people’s reach. Advanced technology and intricate challenges facing humanity are often so complex that people cannot distinguish the underlying science from magic; You have to believe it by faith.

This gap between science and democracy is where motivated actors can press their advantage by questioning objectivity, sowing doubt, and clouding people’s understanding of the world. And when there is no objective truth that people can agree on, Otto says they often resort to spite or violence to resolve differences.

Instead, Otto called on scientists to advocate for and advance objective truth, even in the absence of a modern media ecosystem that appears to have abandoned objectivity. “If you think about it, what science is is journalism, right? You have diaries,” he said. “All it is is a huge story where we tell what we tried, what experiments we did, what they showed and what we think that means. It’s just that as scientists we believe there is such a thing as objectivity.”

Otto gave scientists advice on how to get involved in this movement and how to communicate science more effectively.

He called on scientists to move away from the sidelines of government, politics and civic engagement. You should look for opportunities to advise policymakers, from the U.S. Congress to local school boards, or even run for office yourself. You should study and understand what drives political beliefs. And they should support legal action and regulation against disinformation.

However, it all starts with direct communication, where scientists all too often fail to make people understand how science works.

“We need to change how we communicate about science from telling people what we know to explaining how we know it,” he said, adding that explaining the methodology and guiding people through it is crucial to conduct a scientific process. “They can learn the what by hearing the how, and when they do that, they own that knowledge themselves.” They are much more convinced than if you just told them something.”

Active listening is also important to openly engage and understand how someone came to believe what they believe and only then ask if you can offer a different point of view.

“This helps bridge some of those divides,” Otto said. “Once you’ve really and faithfully listened to them and validated and validated what they said, you can say, ‘May I share my experience with you?’ At this point, people usually feel obligated to say, “Yeah, okay,” because you’ve listened to them.”

As he concluded his remarks, Otto acknowledged that the work ahead for science will be long and ongoing. Regaining an advantage against increasing disinformation will not happen overnight. But that’s no reason not to try.

“All of these things bring us to a precarious moment, but one that is not without hope,” he said. “I am confident that we have the opportunity to make great progress and make some positive changes as the situation changes.”

Related