Podcasts are media files that can be automatically aggregated and downloaded via the internet, and transferred to portable media players. Combined with online discussion facilities, podcasts represent flexible and potentially valuable tools for communicating about science. This pilot project aimed to assess the role of science podcasts in stimulating discussions, or ‘podologues’, about science through detailed analyses of a sample of five popular science podcasts. Two main methods were used: content analysis of online discussion forums and blogs associated with the five podcasts and interviews with listeners. The results show that podcasts are regarded as valuable sources of scientific information by listeners and that blogs and forums can act as public spaces for audience members to share knowledge, develop their own ideas about science and provide feedback to media producers. Larger, more detailed studies are required to further understand the value of podcasts for stimulating public discourse about science.

Pro- and anti-vaccination users use social media outlets, such as Twitter, to join conversations about vaccines, disseminate information or misinformation about immunization, and advocate in favour or against vaccinations. These users not only share textual content, but also images to emphasise their messages and influence their audiences. Though previous studies investigated the content of vaccine images, there is little research on how these visuals are distributed in digital environments. Therefore, this study explored how images related to vaccination are shared on Twitter to gain insight into the communities and networks formed around their dissemination. Moreover, this research also investigated who influences the distribution of vaccine images, and could be potential gatekeepers of vaccination information. We conducted a social network analysis on samples of tweets with images collected in June, September and October 2016. In each dataset, pro- and anti-vaccination users formed two polarised networks that hardly interacted with each other, and disseminated images among their members differently. The anti-vaccination users frequently retweeted each other, strengthening their relationships, making the information redundant within their community, and confirming their beliefs against immunisation. The pro-vaccine users, instead, formed a fragmented network, with loose but strategic connections that facilitated networking and the distribution of new vaccine information. Moreover, while the pro-vaccine gatekeepers were non-governmental organisations or health professionals, the anti-vaccine ones were activists and/or parents. Activists and parents could potentially be considered as alternative but trustworthy sources of information enabling them to disseminate misinformation about vaccinations.

In recent years, the public visibility of science has greatly increased. In the digital media landscape, a wide range of players is now engaged in science communication via various online channels. While these developments offer opportunities, they also entail risks for the quality of science communication. This study explores how the quality of science communication can be assessed and promoted in the increasingly complex digital ecosystem. A two-wave survey with international science communication experts served as a basis to develop a quality framework for digital science communication and to formulate strategies to promote the quality of science communication online. Besides these outcomes, results hint at blind spots in the discourse of science communication quality that demand further investigation and reflection.

“The Chemedian and the Crazy Football Match” is a comic strip developed by the authors to bring humour to aspects of the UK primary science curriculum. The comic strip was tested in six English primary school classes (years 3–5; ages 7–10); over 150 children participated in the project, together with six teachers. Children found the comic strip fun to read and engaged with the character. In addition, children were able to provide explanations for the ‘science’ performed by the Chemedian based on their own experience. However, it was notable that children found it hard to project actions the Chemedian would take in other similar situations that were based on the same scientific premises used in the comic strip. Instead, children seemed to draw on either their own preferences for actions or on actions they expected other more generalised comic characters might undertake. From the teacher assessments of class behaviour, it was clear that the comic strip format had engaged children, particularly boys, in what was essentially a reading and discussion based activity. This approach might open up new avenues for cross curricular links between science and literacy.

This study explores the types of actors visible in the digital science communication landscape in the Netherlands, Serbia and the U.K. Using the Koru model of science communication as a basis, we consider how science communicators craft their messages and which channels they are using to reach audiences. The study took as case studies the topics of climate change and healthy diets to enable comparison across countries, topics and platforms. These findings are compared with the results from a survey of over 200 science communication practitioners based in these countries. We find that although traditional media are challenged by the variety of different new entrants into the digital landscape, our results suggest that the media and journalists remain highly visible. In addition, our survey results suggest that many science communicators may struggle to gain traction in the crowded digital ecology, and in particular, that relatively few scientists and research institutions and universities are achieving a high profile in the public digital media ecology of science communication.

This research examined the collaborative processes of making theatre inspired by science through the analysis of 16 semi-structured interviews with individual collaborators (eight theatre practitioners and eight scientists). Interviews explored experiences, including their motivations, working processes, challenges, learning and understanding. Roles of scientists in the collaboration ranged from expert advisor to equal creative collaborator. Factors affecting partnerships included curiosity for each other’s practice, social interaction and mutual respect. The research suggests that scientists could be motivated to undertake ‘Sci-Art’ collaborations through personal interest, as well as previously identified motives such as encouragement from their department. The project also identified benefits to researchers from such collaborations, including developing new perspectives on their own practice.