Note to our followers: Due to a lack of sufficient funding, will cease daily publication of new content at the end of 2018. Publisher Gary Schwitzer and other contributors may post new articles periodically. If you wish to donate, your gift might help keep the site available to the public for a few more years, by defraying costs of web hosting and maintenance. All of our 6,000+ published articles contain lessons to help people improve their critical thinking about health care. Read more about our change in status. And here's how to make a donation.

Does the public trust science? A university communicator’s reflections

One “peek behind the curtain” of how news releases can sometimes emanate from academic medical centers – or their researchers – was provided by our managing editor Kevin Lomangino’s piece this week, “NanoKnife fight at the University of Louisville: Why a disputed news release reflects important truths about health care news.”

Another “peek behind the curtain” was published today by Kirk Englehardt, Director of Research Communication at the Georgia Institute of Technology, on his SciLogs blog. His piece was entitled, “University Communication & Trust in Science: A Peek Behind the Curtain.”

It reflected on how “the job of a university communicator has changed a lot in the past 10 years,” as Englehardt said at a recent National Academy of Sciences workshop, “Does the Public Trust Science?” – all explained in his post.

It’s a good article, which includes a video of the panel he was involved in at the NAS workshop (below) and a list of links to related resources.

Just last month, Englehardt wrote about our project’s introduction and publication of systematic reviews of health care news releases, including many by universities, in his post, “Meet the (Research) Press Release Police.

The continued, open discussion of these important issues is healthy and welcome.

You might also like


We Welcome Comments. But please note: We will delete comments left by anyone who doesn’t leave an actual first and last name and an actual email address.

We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified facts, product pitches, or profanity. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. Comments should primarily discuss the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages about health and medicine. This is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science. Nor is it a forum to share your personal story about a disease or treatment -- your comment must relate to media messages about health care. If your comment doesn't adhere to these policies, we won't post it. Questions? Please see more on our comments policy.

Comments are closed.