在專家、媒體與公眾之間：作為科技風險溝通途徑的新興科技媒體中心

面對科技爭議事件，政府主要使用兩種途徑與公眾溝通，一是欠缺模式，強調教育公眾使之瞭解新興科技的實質內涵；二是審議模式，透過公眾參與而將此過程中的社會價值與建議，回饋到科技政策中。但從英國科學媒體中心（Science Media Centre, SMC）的運作經驗可瞥見，媒體的角色在這兩個溝通途徑中相形弱化。英國SMC以「唯有當科學家有良好的媒體溝通能力，媒體才能報導更好的科學新聞」作為其成立的核心理念，並依此發展科技溝通（science communication）典範。而新興科技媒體中心亦將承接此核心理念，試圖在臺灣的脈絡下，發展連結專家與媒體的策略，進而建構更妥適的科技風險溝通途徑。

關鍵字

科技溝通；科學媒體中心；科學新聞；專家與媒體；新興科技媒體中心

並列摘要

Governments typically adopt one of two strategies in response to disputes involving science and technology. The first strategy, called the ＂deficit model,＂ aims to resolve disputes by educating the public and filling the knowledge gaps that exist between laypeople and experts. The second strategy, called the ＂deliberation model,＂ recruits stakeholders to discuss specific issues, thus allowing socially-valued collective opinions to be brought into conversations and so influence policy making. However, there is a third model that bridges experts and media to enforce the quality of science news broadcasting. This model was developed by the Science Media Centre (SMC) in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2002. The implementation of this model has successfully confronted long-standing scientific disputes in the UK, with the result that the model was gradually adopted in four other countries around the world. The motto of the UK SMC is ＂The media will DO science better when scientists DO the media better,＂ and the approach encapsulated in this slogan has become an important paradigm that keeps empowering experts and journalists in the communication of science. Inspired by UK SMC, Science Media Center Taiwan was established in 2017, and joined the international SMCs in 2019. After two years of operation, the center implements practices to identify strengths and challenges, and provides valuable insights by routinely identifying communication difficulties between experts and journalists. Rebuilding trust in the communication of science is feasible but requires not only individual changes, but an enormous transformation of civil society.

並列關鍵字

science communication ； Science Media Centre ； science news ； experts and media ； Science Media Center Taiwan

參考文獻

林國明（2009）。〈國家、公民社會與審議民主：公民會議在臺灣的發展經驗〉，《臺灣社會學》，17：161-217。doi:10.6676/TS.2009.17.161

林國明、陳東升（2003）。〈公民會議與審議民主：全民健保的公民參與經驗〉，《臺灣社會學》，6：61-118。doi:10.6676/TS.2003.6.61

林崇熙（2000）。〈從兩種文化到「科技與社會」〉，《通識教育季刊》，7（4）：39-58。doi:10.6745/JGE.200012_7(4).0003

陳東升（2006）。〈審議民主的限制─臺灣公民會議的經驗〉，《臺灣民主季刊》，3（1）：77-104。doi:10.6448/TDQ.200603.0077

邱玉蟬、游絲涵（2016）。〈食品安全事件的風險建構與溝通：新聞媒體 VS. 政府〉，《中華傳播學刊》，30：179-220。doi:10.6195/cjcr.2016.30.06

國際替代計量

在專家、媒體與公眾之間：作為科技風險溝通途徑的新興科技媒體中心

全文下載

主題瀏覽