The constant changing world that is the media is greatly
influencing other parts of communities. Despite the protests of many
scientists, media technologies have indeed effected and influenced science in many
ways, shapes and forms. The advancement of technologies has enabled research
findings to become widespread and diversity has increased.
Furthermore interest with scientific findings has reached the
general public’s radar more so then ever imaginable. There is a new movement
for scientists to openly publish all of their research findings and the process
of their experiments (Willbanks, 2011).
Some scientists have already adopted an open science mind set with
websites such as PLoS, GlazyZoo and ResearchGate being set up
to facilitate discussions (Thomas, 2012). This has enabled the progression of
many scientific collaborations that would otherwise be inpossible.
However not all scientists are on
board with releasing their findings into the general public domain as they
believe that this is not how findings should be presented.
All variations of change within an established field have their pros and
cons. Pisani (2011) discusses how “sharing
data will change the way medical science works and speed up the discovery of
new cures” (Pisani E, 2011). This idea of sharing is especially vital in the
medical fields as one rare case can possibly save a life half way around the
world. Similarly doctors and medical professionals can learn from methods that
aren't as effective as others. This progression of medical communication will
prove to speed up the development of treatments and procedures across the
world.
Pisani (2011) also addresses
the downside to open communication between scientists; the validity of
researchers can come into question if all mistakes and neutral results are made
public. Also the issue of copyright of findings comes into question as more
findings can be published and copied. Another issue that has risen is that
forums are coming about that are publishing non-peer reviewed articles that are
being taken as fact by the general population.
This influx of unreliable information can be seen in one of the biggest
scientific debate that is currently dominating the media, that of climate
change or global warming. The climate change debate is fuelled by
information that is not scientifically proven being published and debated
online. This movement heightens the intensity of an important situation but for
all the wrong reasons. Rather than focusing on the scientifically proven data
about the issue people are choosing to listen to what they already believe as
fact. This can and has cause great issues for governments and societies to
activate change.
This widespread knowledge leads to social change, enhanced by media
technologies science can and will have a greater influence on innovative
movements. However as with all parts of life, open science most understand that
with great power comes great responsibility.
References
Lin, Thomas (2012) ‘Cracking Open the Scientific Process’, The New
York Times, January 16, 2012
<http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/17/science/open-science-challenges-journal-tradition-with-web-collaboration.html?_r=4&partner=rss&emc=rss&pagewanted=all>
Pisani, Elizabeth (2011) ‘Medical science will benefit from the research
of crowds’, The Guardian, January 11, <http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/11/medical-research-data-sharing>
Wilbanks,
John (2011) ‘On Science Publishing’, Seed, <http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/on_science_publishing>
No comments:
Post a Comment