Stollorz Volker
Science Media Center Germany gGmbH, Rosenstr. 42-44, 50678, Köln, Deutschland.
Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2021 Jan;64(1):70-76. doi: 10.1007/s00103-020-03257-x. Epub 2020 Dec 2.
The mass media has made the SARS-CoV‑2 virus a so-called global event. The volume and congruence of the journalistic selection of topics in Germany exceeds that of the already high level of the H1N1 pandemic 2009 many times over. In this discussion article, challenges for journalism that have arisen in reporting on the scientific aspects of the COVID-19 pandemic are described.At the beginning of the pandemic, there was a real epistemic uncertainty due to the lack of established facts. Many editorial offices lacked professional routines for the competent handling of preliminary research results and for the evaluation of scientific reputation of experts. Dealing with scientific articles that had not yet undergone peer review (preprints) became a major challenge. If peer review isn't available, science journalists have to develop new indicators to assess the quality and relevance of a preprint research publication and they need to be better equipped to distinguish valuable scientific contributions from mere "hype."The phenomena observed during pandemic reporting show how essential independent professional science journalism is for the democratic discourse, because only in this way can nonscientific audiences correctly classify truthful and relevant scientific content conveyed and develop informed trust in science.
大众媒体已将严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2(SARS-CoV-2)病毒变成了一场所谓的全球事件。德国新闻选题的数量和一致性比2009年甲型H1N1流感大流行时本就很高的水平还要高出许多倍。在这篇讨论文章中,描述了在报道2019冠状病毒病大流行科学方面时新闻业所面临的挑战。在大流行初期,由于缺乏既定事实,确实存在认知上的不确定性。许多编辑部缺乏妥善处理初步研究结果以及评估专家科学声誉的专业常规流程。处理尚未经过同行评审的科学文章(预印本)成为了一项重大挑战。如果没有同行评审,科学记者就必须制定新的指标来评估预印本研究出版物的质量和相关性,而且他们需要具备更强的能力,以区分有价值的科学贡献和纯粹的“炒作”。在大流行报道期间观察到的现象表明,独立的专业科学新闻报道对于民主话语是多么重要,因为只有这样,非科学受众才能正确归类所传达的真实且相关的科学内容,并对科学产生明智的信任。