Accurately understand the scientific and social nature of science news

Author: Wang Jiangtao (Southern Weekend Reporter)

Source: "Youth Reporter", No. 13, 2022

The new coronary pneumonia epidemic has been popular in the world for more than two years in early 2020. Under the urgent situation of the changing epidemic, through scientific news reports, the latest developments of scientific issues such as virus mutation as soon as possible will help the public and epidemic prevention departments. Deepen the understanding of virus and epidemic, timely adjust the response methods, and even play a certain role in promoting communication between global scientists. However, due to different epidemic prevention policies at home and abroad, such as whether the epidemic prevention and control is scientific and the threat of the virus is serious, these issues have caused a certain confusion among the public in different places. [1] Science tries to discover the universal laws in nature, and scientific news must face specific real society. Judging from the relevant reports at home and abroad, there are problems that have no accurate understanding of the scientific and social nature of scientific news reports. This article is based on the topic of scientific news reports related to the new coronary pneumonia.

Scientific journalism in social environment

With the deepening of scientific research, especially after entering the micro -world, the distance between the scientific facts and the daily life that people can be visible to the naked eye is getting farther and farther. From scientists from scientists to the public, the media actually plays a very important intermediary role. Most people will not obtain scientific information through scientific papers and other methods. Instead, they rely on news media and other media. Relying on agenda settings and framework selection in the social environment. [2] For scientific news, the social environment here includes not only routine social factors such as politics, economy, and culture, but also the public's scientific literacy, scientific information acquisition methods, the situation of participation in scientific discussions, and interactive relationships with the media, etc. Essence After considering the factors of different knowledge backgrounds and different socio -economic status, the social environment facing scientific journalists is actually quite complicated. For scientific journals that involve public decision -making and behavior changes in the environment and health, it is even more That's it. On the other hand, it also highlights the unique value of good scientific news on society and the public, as well as the difficulties of editing and dissemination of related scientific journals. These values ​​and difficulties are relatively reflected in the process of using scientific guidance. The significance of scientific decision -making is important because most of the elements required for good decisions have been embedded in the spirit and practice. On the one hand, science provides a solid factual foundation for decision -making by accurately studying the objective world operation method; on the other hand, the comprehensiveness of scientific considerations can help people weigh the value of different choices. More importantly, scientific handling of uncertainty has a relatively mature way from principle to operation. The flexibility required for decision -making and adaptability to changes in internal and external conditions. [3] Scientific news on public media also plays an important role in scientific decision -making and corresponding social environment transformation.

From the perspective of government administration, scientific decision -making, as the principle of major administrative decision -making, has been written into the State Council regulations. Article 5 of the Interim Regulations on the Implementation of the Implementation and Implementation in 2019 states that major administrative decisions must adhere to the actual situation, use science, technology and methods, respect objective laws, and meet the requirements of economic and social development and comprehensively deepen reform requirements. [4] The scientific decision -making in the system design of the regulations is reflected in the requirements of research and demonstration before decision -making, research and negotiation, expert demonstration, risk assessment, timely adjustment, and decision -making evaluation before the decision -making draft decision -making. [5] In scientific news reports involving public interests, the administrative behavior of these government scientific decisions will also become a prominent social environment when the public obtains scientific information, affecting the understanding of scientific uncertainty. Not only is political consideration, but in the communication and decision -making environment faced by scientific journalism, scientific knowledge produced based on scientific methods, and the collective wisdom formed by the public based on daily experience, is also different, but has its own emphasis and political wisdom Together with the traditional, three types of guidance decisions must be considered in the same way. It also reminds scientific news reports not only pay attention to scientific facts, but also pay attention to the difference in value in the same matter, because when people value is different, it is simply clarified to clarify simply clarification Facts do not always form a consensus in society, especially considering that the scope of people facing science news is different, and the degree of trust in science is also different. [6] For scientific news related to the new crown pneumonia, the social environment presents some obvious characteristics.

First of all, the new coronal virus is a newly discovered virus that has been found on the society since the epidemic. It is different from that of monkey acne virus and other viruses that have been discovered first and have scientific research records and vaccines. This means that not only the general public does not understand the characteristics of the virus, but the scientist's understanding of the new crown virus has also started from scratch after the epidemic. For scientific news, problems such as virus infectious, after infection, and how to prevent and treat the problems are fragmented, and there are uncertainty. As the virus mutations are mutated, the answers to related issues are also changing. Secondly, the new crown pneumonia has been identified by the World Health Organization as a global epidemic in early 2020. It has a wide range of influence and involves many countries. Different countries have formulated different epidemic prevention policies according to their epidemic conditions and epidemic prevention goals. Thirdly, in terms of the specific domestic epidemic prevention, according to the "Infectious Disease Prevention Law", the health administrative department of the State Council and the local people's government at or above the county level are responsible for the prevention and management of infectious diseases in the country and their own administrative regions. Therefore, under the national epidemic prevention policy, appropriate prevention measures will be adopted according to the specific epidemic conditions to collect, analyze, report, and predict the relevant information of infectious diseases. Announce the infectious disease epidemic information to the society. [7] These have a basic social environment that constitutes a report on scientific news related to new crown pneumonia. It provides the main reference factors for the scientific and social nature of scientific news reports. Science is the basis of scientific news

Judging from the related scientific news reports since the epidemic, scientificity, as the basis of scientific news, is easily disturbed by some social factors in the process of editing and dissemination, which may affect the public's accurate understanding of related scientific information, even in The public causes certain confusion. There are several situations that may cause interference to scientific interference.

The first is directly used directly on public health research data related to various types of new coronary pneumonia. After the epidemic, scientists from all over the world are relayed and cooperated to conduct research on the characteristics of the new coronary virus, including the infectious and toxicity of the virus. Research. Judging from the risk of evaluating the virus in society, the public health data monitored in the actuality not only obtains fast time, but also has strong guidance on the overall impact of the virus. issue. For example, the changes in the number of infections in a certain place, estimate the infectiousness of the virus, or study the virus toxicity and death risk of virus by the number of infections and infections. Scientific news reports on these scientific discoveries in various places, and it makes sense for risk research and judgment of the public. However, due to the limitations of research methods, the research based on this type of data is uncertain in understanding the inherent characteristics of the virus. In practice, the differences in regional scope, the composition of the sample group, the epidemic prevention and control measures, and even the data monitoring capacity and other differences All will affect the explanation of relevant scientific discovery. However, when some scientific news reports the relevant scientific content, it will be directly used directly without explaining the research data, which cannot accurately convey the connotation of relevant scientific information. Some subject content directly translates to the scientific report of foreign media content, and related research is exactly in the local social context. When the public cannot distinguish what is the difference between the environment they are and the environment introduced in the report, it will interfere with the public's understanding of the virus.

The second type is improper interpretation of the effect of new crown vaccine or therapeutic drugs. After the new coronary pneumonia epidemic, scientists in the medical fields in various places find ways to find ways to respond to the epidemic in the new crown pneumonia through experimenting with various methods such as ready -made drugs, developing new drugs, and different types of vaccines. The successful research and development of the new crown vaccine also set a new speed record for vaccine research and development. For the approval of the drug obtaining regulatory authorities for treatment and prevention of a certain disease, it is generally necessary to go through the three phases of clinical trials, from laboratory operations to animal tests, and then small -scale and large -scale human tests to understand a drug that can understand a drug. What is the effect. The third phase of the clinical trial data is that the number of participants is more and the reference value is greater. After the pharmaceutical listing, the effect data obtained by the pharmaceutical listing is also critical to understand the effect of understanding a drug through longer and larger research. However, since the epidemic, there have been some reports of improper interpretation of the effect of the new crown therapeutic drugs and the new crown vaccine. The most common is exaggeration to the efficacy, or objectively misleading the public due to the unclear explanation. Taking vaccines as an example, the common improper interpretation includes that regardless of the clinical trials at the stage and scope of the clinical trial, the public misunderstands the effect of a vaccine product. Generally speaking, the more the test will increase as the participants increase. During the period of great popularity, many vaccines have adopted multiple clinical trials in many places, and different efficient data will be reported even at the same stage. Furthermore, the efficiency of the vaccine emphasizes it. Speaking, some public mistakenly believe that certain vaccines are perfect. As vaccines are an important measure to respond to epidemics during the world, these improper interpretations will affect the public's understanding of vaccine risks.

The third type is not updated in a timely and fully update report on the mutation of the new crown virus. According to data from the World Health Organization, after the new crown pneumonia epidemic occurs, there are five kinds of mutant strains worthy of attention on the basis of virus strains, namely Alpha, Beta, gamma, Delta, Omikon, these these, these these, these these. These are these. Mutations have either a significant enhancement of infectious or toxicity, which has caused reduced efficiency of public health response measures. [8] In short, the situation faced by the epidemic prevention and control has undergone relatively obvious changes, especially after the appearance of Delta and Omikon. However, a series of changes to the new crown virus in a timely and fully update report have made the general public clearly understand how the new coronal virus has experienced. It is not easy. Under the relatively stable epidemic prevention and control measures, many people have not realized the significant changes in the new crown virus from the scientific level. The fourth type is reported on scientific news that has not been reported from the overall situation of the epidemic prevention and control. After the new coronary pneumonia's epidemic, based on its own "big population, many aging population, unbalanced regional development, and insufficient medical resources", from the perspective of the people's supremacy and life supremacy, the state adopted external prevention input and internal defense rebound. Adhere to the prevention and control measures such as dynamic clearance. [9] This is different from the epidemic prevention and control measures adopted by most foreign countries. However, after the epidemic, with the changes in the global epidemic, scientific news reported from the scientific level, dynamic comparison analysis of the prevention and control measures and basis of the epidemic in the report, and continued to review the scientific science of relevant policies. In fact, from the perspective of statistical data such as new crown pneumonia infection and death, the effects of different social epidemic prevention measures are very different. Affects epidemic prevention results. However, in the changing epidemic, the scientific basis behind the epidemic is not very clear. Therefore, it may be confused when facing changing epidemic prevention measures, and even doubts about the scientific nature of some measures. The lack of scientific communication from the overall situation of the epidemic prevention and control has actually caused interference in the scientific nature of related scientific news. These scientific news reports may affect science and can be resolved targeted in practice.

Take into account both science and sociality

More rigorous and critical scientific news reports can make the public more informed and sober, and it is more willing to participate in science -related public debates to promote social development. [10] From the perspective of the scientific and social aspects of scientific news reports, only by distinguishing between the two more accurately, clarifying the interference factors, and taking into account both With society, promote social functions such as scientific decision -making.

News from epidemic prevention and control measures involving scientific decision -making is more related to scientific facts, and the differences in values ​​are more complicated. It should also take into account the scientific and social nature. The most basic, epidemic prevention and control requires the infectious and pathogenicity of the virus, especially the natural characteristics of viruses such as viruses such as death risk, as well as the effectiveness of available vaccines, the obtaining situation of the vaccine, the actual actual situation of the social group level And the expected level of immunity, the necessary social resource conditions such as the total amount of medical resources and distribution that can be used for the treatment of new crown pneumonia, etc., and will inevitably be affected by laws and regulations, political systems, epidemic prevention goals, economic and social impacts, public, and public. Understanding and acceptance of the degree of acceptance, and the differences in the differences in social factors. Coordinating considering relevant scientific and social factors is needed for scientific decision -making, and it is also needed to pay attention to the bridge of relevant scientific news reports as a bridge for information communication. The well -known academic journals Science and Nature have discussed the challenges faced by the clearing policy after the appearance of Delta and Omikon. When Delta's infectious power rose significantly, some countries with a zero -zero policy began to abandon, and Science proposed how the infectious amount of infectious volume would change after re -release. [11] When Omikon caused more difficult prevention and control, Nature analyzed the corresponding conditions required to clear the immune breakthrough challenge and policy transformation. [12] Although these reports consciously reviewed the epidemic prevention and control policies from scientific, they failed to explain different measures taken by relevant countries from a broader and specific social environmental factors. On May 5, 2022, the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China held a meeting to analyze the adherence to external prevention input, internal defense rebound, and dynamic clearance from multiple perspectives, such as global epidemics, virus mutation, population structure, medical resources, and political nature. Prevention and control measures are scientific and effective.

The new coronary pneumonia's epidemic is still continuing, and the scientific and social needs of relevant scientific news reports have both scientific and social needs. Inspiration. The critical issue is that the uncertainty of scientific issues may have conflicts between different regions and different scope of social environment. Behind scientific decision -making is not only scientific facts, but also the differences between positions and values. Compared to clarifying the facts of scientific, the difference in harmonious values ​​is also very important to find the maximum convention. From this point of view, condense the public's consensus on science, and builds a bridge between scientists and the public through formal or informal scientific education early, which can make the subsequent related scientific communication processes more effective. [13] At present, the problem of imbalances in the unbalance of public scientific quality of the world is still very prominent. Scientific knowledge sharing barriers, knowledge gaps and development of gaps, etc., have to be eliminated and narrowed by scientific education, dissemination and popularization. [14] China attaches great importance to the popularization of science. In the process, the scientific communication system, including scientific news reports, can improve the scientific literacy of the public through daily work, expand its scientific information acquisition method, guide the public to participate in scientific discussions and pass through the scientific discussion and pass Interaction with the media deepen the understanding of science, enhance the trust of science and the media, thereby enhancing the level of scientific decision -making of the whole society, better promoting social development and progress, and promoting the construction of a community of human destiny. Reference format for this article:

Wang Jiangtao. Accurately understand the scientific and social nature of science news [J]. Young reporter, 2022 (13): 54-56.

- END -