Forms of propaganda and presentation of scientific achievements using media tools
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26577/HJ.2020.v55.i1.08Keywords:
transformation of scientific journalism, representation of science, scientific and educa- tional activities, personalization method.Abstract
The propaganda of the achievements of science is framed in special forms and carried out by profes- sional media in collaboration with the scientific community. The appeal to the mass audience of scien- tific material can be seen at the level of submission of the analysis of scientific information.
The purpose of this article is to analyze the components of discussion in the context of the repre- sentation of science in a social scientific environment. The author explains the weakness of analytical components with the simplification of content in the information consumption market.
The scientific and practical value of the study is to establish the degree of dependence of scientific and educational activities on the level of integration of mass communication and scientific journalism.
In the course of the analysis of this topic, along with empirical methods such as description, control and comparison, systematization and study of documents, sociometric methods, theoretical axiomatic approaches based on research by foreign scientists were also used.
The main results of a scientific article are: an analysis of the importance of scientific and educational activities for the development of the state and meeting the needs of society; recommendations on the development of mechanisms to stimulate research and increase the status of a scientist.
The value of the article. The author claims that for the development of scientific journalism pro- paganda of scientific information alone is not enough. And he comes to the conclusion that scientific innovations and publications should be submitted through the tools of scientific communication, taking into account the characteristics of the audience.
References
Abbott, A. (2011).The System of Professions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011. – p.263.
Arulchelvan, S. (2010). Science and technology dissemination through Tamil newspapers: A study. Indian Journal of Science Communication, 9(2), p.3–9.
Bagla, P. (2002). Good science journalism-and barriers to it in India. Science and Media: An International Workshop, Tobago, West Indies. – pp.96-115.
Bucchi, M. (2008). Of deficits, deviations and dialogues: theories of public communication of science // Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology / Ed. by M. Bucchi, B. Trench. Routledge: London, 2008. p.57-76.
Burns, Kelli S. (2017). Social Media: A Reference Handbook. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. ISBN 978-1-4408-4355-6. Chauhan, N.M. (2011). Aptitude of the programme coordinators of Krishi Vigyan Kendras of India. Indian Research Journal of
Extension Education, 11(3), p.19–24.
Dickert, S., & Slovic, P. (2009). Attential Mechanisms in the Generation of science communications / The science and technology, Vol. 1(5), p.83.
Eastwood, John D., Smilek, D., & Merikle, P. (2001). DifferentialEmotion. Per- ception & Psychophysics, 63(6), pp.1004-1013.
Felt, U., Fochler, M. (2012). Re-ordering Epistemic Living Spaces: On the Tacit Governance Effects of the Public Communication of Science//Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook 29. Dortrecht: Springer, 2012. p.133-154.
Freidson, E. (2001). Professionalism. The Third Logic. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2001. – p.193.
Gambarato, R. (2017). Transmedia Project Design: Theoretical and Analytical Considerations / R. Gambarato // Baltic Screen Media review: Vol.1. – р.84-85.
Gazzaniga, Michael S. (2012). The Social Brain: Discovering the Networks International Journal, 4 (1), pp.7-16. Gopichandran, R. (2014). Some important facets of science communications. Dream 2047, 15(10), p.35.
Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence Culture. New York, NY: New York University Press, USA. – 308 p.
Kapoor, N. (2012). A science information resource hub for sustainable science communication. In Proceedings of International Conference on Science Communication (pp. 98–103). New Delhi: Communication and Information Resources (NISCAIR), CSIR.
Knorr Cetina, K. (2003). Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2003. – p.310.
Maheshwar, M., Gavaravarapu, S. R. M., Venkaiah, M., & Rao, D. R. (2014). The quality of nutrition research reporting by leading daily newspapers in India. Journal of Media and Communication Studies, 6(6), p.92–98.
Media for Science Forum. (2010). Meta-review: The crisis of media, the relocation of the journalists’ world and the decline of science sections in the context of the Internet communicative and social revolution. Media for Science Forum, 12–13 May 2010, Madrid, Spain. Available on www.mediaforscience.com
Nautiyal, C. M. (2010). Science and science communication in India. In S. Priest (Ed.), The encyclopaedia of science and technology communication / New York, NY: Basic Books. – pp.381–388.
Norman, Kent L. (2017). Cyberpsychology: An Introduction to Human-Computer Interaction. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-10254-5.
Patairiya, M. (2007). Science journalism in India. The Pantaneto Forum Home Page, January 25, 2007. Available on www. pantaneto.co.uk/issue25/patairiya.htm
Patil, S. S., & Kokate, K. D. (2011). Training need assessment of subject matter specialists of Krishi Vigyan Kendras. Indian Research Journal of Extension Education, 11(1), p.19–22.
Phillips, A. (2012). A Creator’s Guide to Transmedia Storytelling: How to Captivate and Engage Audiences Across Multiple Platforms Hardcover. June 23, 288 p.
Rajput, A. S. D. (2008). Science communication: Careers and courses in India. Current Science, 95(11), p.1513. SciLogs in association with Nature.com, (2015). available on www.scilogs.com
Sciulli, D. (2010). Continental Sociology of Professions Today: Conceptual Contributions// Current Sociology, November 2010.
Vol. 46, №5. p.915-942.
Scolari, C.A. (2009). Transmedia Storytelling: Implicit Consumers, Narrative Worlds and Branding in Contemporary Media Production / C.A. Scolari // International Journal of Communication. Vol. 3. № 4. – p.203-223.
Shankar, A. and Goulding, C. (2001). Interpretive consumer research: Science communication: Careers and courses in India. Current Science, 102(8), p.1415.
Shanton, Karen; Goldman, Alvin (2010). Simulation theory. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science. doi:12.12/ wcs.83. Retrieved 2012-10-09.
Shipman, N. (2012). Scientists: Social media is not necessarily a waste of time. Sympathy. Judgment and Decision Making, 4(4), pp.297-306.
Weingart, P. (2003). Science and the media // Research Policy, 2003, 23 (5). – p.841-863.
References
Abbott, A. (2011).The System of Professions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011. – p.263.
Arulchelvan, S. (2010). Science and technology dissemination through Tamil newspapers: A study. Indian Journal of Science Communication, 9(2), p.3–9.
Bagla, P. (2002). Good science journalism-and barriers to it in India. Science and Media: An International Workshop, Tobago, West Indies. – pp.96-115.
Bucchi, M. (2008). Of deficits, deviations and dialogues: theories of public communication of science // Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology / Ed. by M. Bucchi, B. Trench. Routledge: London, 2008. p.57-76.
Burns, Kelli S. (2017). Social Media: A Reference Handbook. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. ISBN 978-1-4408-4355-6. Chauhan, N.M. (2011). Aptitude of the programme coordinators of Krishi Vigyan Kendras of India. Indian Research Journal of
Extension Education, 11(3), p.19–24.
Dickert, S., & Slovic, P. (2009). Attential Mechanisms in the Generation of science communications / The science and technology, Vol. 1(5), p.83.
Eastwood, John D., Smilek, D., & Merikle, P. (2001). DifferentialEmotion. Per- ception & Psychophysics, 63(6), pp.1004-1013.
Felt, U., Fochler, M. (2012). Re-ordering Epistemic Living Spaces: On the Tacit Governance Effects of the Public Communication of Science//Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook 29. Dortrecht: Springer, 2012. p.133-154.
Freidson, E. (2001). Professionalism. The Third Logic. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2001. – p.193.
Gambarato, R. (2017). Transmedia Project Design: Theoretical and Analytical Considerations / R. Gambarato // Baltic Screen Media review: Vol.1. – р.84-85.
Gazzaniga, Michael S. (2012). The Social Brain: Discovering the Networks International Journal, 4 (1), pp.7-16. Gopichandran, R. (2014). Some important facets of science communications. Dream 2047, 15(10), p.35.
Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence Culture. New York, NY: New York University Press, USA. – 308 p.
Kapoor, N. (2012). A science information resource hub for sustainable science communication. In Proceedings of International Conference on Science Communication (pp. 98–103). New Delhi: Communication and Information Resources (NISCAIR), CSIR.
Knorr Cetina, K. (2003). Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2003. – p.310.
Maheshwar, M., Gavaravarapu, S. R. M., Venkaiah, M., & Rao, D. R. (2014). The quality of nutrition research reporting by leading daily newspapers in India. Journal of Media and Communication Studies, 6(6), p.92–98.
Media for Science Forum. (2010). Meta-review: The crisis of media, the relocation of the journalists’ world and the decline of science sections in the context of the Internet communicative and social revolution. Media for Science Forum, 12–13 May 2010, Madrid, Spain. Available on www.mediaforscience.com
Nautiyal, C. M. (2010). Science and science communication in India. In S. Priest (Ed.), The encyclopaedia of science and technology communication / New York, NY: Basic Books. – pp.381–388.
Norman, Kent L. (2017). Cyberpsychology: An Introduction to Human-Computer Interaction. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-10254-5.
Patairiya, M. (2007). Science journalism in India. The Pantaneto Forum Home Page, January 25, 2007. Available on www. pantaneto.co.uk/issue25/patairiya.htm
Patil, S. S., & Kokate, K. D. (2011). Training need assessment of subject matter specialists of Krishi Vigyan Kendras. Indian Research Journal of Extension Education, 11(1), p.19–22.
Phillips, A. (2012). A Creator’s Guide to Transmedia Storytelling: How to Captivate and Engage Audiences Across Multiple Platforms Hardcover. June 23, 288 p.
Rajput, A. S. D. (2008). Science communication: Careers and courses in India. Current Science, 95(11), p.1513. SciLogs in association with Nature.com available on www.scilogs.com
Sciulli, D. (2010). Continental Sociology of Professions Today: Conceptual Contributions// Current Sociology, November 2010.
Vol. 46, №5. p.915-942.
Scolari, C.A. (2009). Transmedia Storytelling: Implicit Consumers, Narrative Worlds and Branding in Contemporary Media Production / C.A. Scolari // International Journal of Communication. Vol. 3. № 4. – p.203-223.
Shankar, A. and Goulding, C. (2001). Interpretive consumer research: Science communication: Careers and courses in India. Current Science, 102(8), p.1415.
Shanton, Karen; Goldman, Alvin (2010). Simulation theory. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science. doi:12.12/ wcs.83. Retrieved 2012-10-09.
Shipman, N. (2012). Scientists: Social media is not necessarily a waste of time. Sympathy. Judgment and Decision Making, 4(4), pp.297-306.
Weingart, P. (2003). Science and the media // Research Policy, 2003, 23 (5). – p.841-863.
Arulchelvan, S. (2010). Science and technology dissemination through Tamil newspapers: A study. Indian Journal of Science Communication, 9(2), p.3–9.
Bagla, P. (2002). Good science journalism-and barriers to it in India. Science and Media: An International Workshop, Tobago, West Indies. – pp.96-115.
Bucchi, M. (2008). Of deficits, deviations and dialogues: theories of public communication of science // Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology / Ed. by M. Bucchi, B. Trench. Routledge: London, 2008. p.57-76.
Burns, Kelli S. (2017). Social Media: A Reference Handbook. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. ISBN 978-1-4408-4355-6. Chauhan, N.M. (2011). Aptitude of the programme coordinators of Krishi Vigyan Kendras of India. Indian Research Journal of
Extension Education, 11(3), p.19–24.
Dickert, S., & Slovic, P. (2009). Attential Mechanisms in the Generation of science communications / The science and technology, Vol. 1(5), p.83.
Eastwood, John D., Smilek, D., & Merikle, P. (2001). DifferentialEmotion. Per- ception & Psychophysics, 63(6), pp.1004-1013.
Felt, U., Fochler, M. (2012). Re-ordering Epistemic Living Spaces: On the Tacit Governance Effects of the Public Communication of Science//Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook 29. Dortrecht: Springer, 2012. p.133-154.
Freidson, E. (2001). Professionalism. The Third Logic. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2001. – p.193.
Gambarato, R. (2017). Transmedia Project Design: Theoretical and Analytical Considerations / R. Gambarato // Baltic Screen Media review: Vol.1. – р.84-85.
Gazzaniga, Michael S. (2012). The Social Brain: Discovering the Networks International Journal, 4 (1), pp.7-16. Gopichandran, R. (2014). Some important facets of science communications. Dream 2047, 15(10), p.35.
Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence Culture. New York, NY: New York University Press, USA. – 308 p.
Kapoor, N. (2012). A science information resource hub for sustainable science communication. In Proceedings of International Conference on Science Communication (pp. 98–103). New Delhi: Communication and Information Resources (NISCAIR), CSIR.
Knorr Cetina, K. (2003). Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2003. – p.310.
Maheshwar, M., Gavaravarapu, S. R. M., Venkaiah, M., & Rao, D. R. (2014). The quality of nutrition research reporting by leading daily newspapers in India. Journal of Media and Communication Studies, 6(6), p.92–98.
Media for Science Forum. (2010). Meta-review: The crisis of media, the relocation of the journalists’ world and the decline of science sections in the context of the Internet communicative and social revolution. Media for Science Forum, 12–13 May 2010, Madrid, Spain. Available on www.mediaforscience.com
Nautiyal, C. M. (2010). Science and science communication in India. In S. Priest (Ed.), The encyclopaedia of science and technology communication / New York, NY: Basic Books. – pp.381–388.
Norman, Kent L. (2017). Cyberpsychology: An Introduction to Human-Computer Interaction. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-10254-5.
Patairiya, M. (2007). Science journalism in India. The Pantaneto Forum Home Page, January 25, 2007. Available on www. pantaneto.co.uk/issue25/patairiya.htm
Patil, S. S., & Kokate, K. D. (2011). Training need assessment of subject matter specialists of Krishi Vigyan Kendras. Indian Research Journal of Extension Education, 11(1), p.19–22.
Phillips, A. (2012). A Creator’s Guide to Transmedia Storytelling: How to Captivate and Engage Audiences Across Multiple Platforms Hardcover. June 23, 288 p.
Rajput, A. S. D. (2008). Science communication: Careers and courses in India. Current Science, 95(11), p.1513. SciLogs in association with Nature.com, (2015). available on www.scilogs.com
Sciulli, D. (2010). Continental Sociology of Professions Today: Conceptual Contributions// Current Sociology, November 2010.
Vol. 46, №5. p.915-942.
Scolari, C.A. (2009). Transmedia Storytelling: Implicit Consumers, Narrative Worlds and Branding in Contemporary Media Production / C.A. Scolari // International Journal of Communication. Vol. 3. № 4. – p.203-223.
Shankar, A. and Goulding, C. (2001). Interpretive consumer research: Science communication: Careers and courses in India. Current Science, 102(8), p.1415.
Shanton, Karen; Goldman, Alvin (2010). Simulation theory. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science. doi:12.12/ wcs.83. Retrieved 2012-10-09.
Shipman, N. (2012). Scientists: Social media is not necessarily a waste of time. Sympathy. Judgment and Decision Making, 4(4), pp.297-306.
Weingart, P. (2003). Science and the media // Research Policy, 2003, 23 (5). – p.841-863.
References
Abbott, A. (2011).The System of Professions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011. – p.263.
Arulchelvan, S. (2010). Science and technology dissemination through Tamil newspapers: A study. Indian Journal of Science Communication, 9(2), p.3–9.
Bagla, P. (2002). Good science journalism-and barriers to it in India. Science and Media: An International Workshop, Tobago, West Indies. – pp.96-115.
Bucchi, M. (2008). Of deficits, deviations and dialogues: theories of public communication of science // Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology / Ed. by M. Bucchi, B. Trench. Routledge: London, 2008. p.57-76.
Burns, Kelli S. (2017). Social Media: A Reference Handbook. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. ISBN 978-1-4408-4355-6. Chauhan, N.M. (2011). Aptitude of the programme coordinators of Krishi Vigyan Kendras of India. Indian Research Journal of
Extension Education, 11(3), p.19–24.
Dickert, S., & Slovic, P. (2009). Attential Mechanisms in the Generation of science communications / The science and technology, Vol. 1(5), p.83.
Eastwood, John D., Smilek, D., & Merikle, P. (2001). DifferentialEmotion. Per- ception & Psychophysics, 63(6), pp.1004-1013.
Felt, U., Fochler, M. (2012). Re-ordering Epistemic Living Spaces: On the Tacit Governance Effects of the Public Communication of Science//Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook 29. Dortrecht: Springer, 2012. p.133-154.
Freidson, E. (2001). Professionalism. The Third Logic. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2001. – p.193.
Gambarato, R. (2017). Transmedia Project Design: Theoretical and Analytical Considerations / R. Gambarato // Baltic Screen Media review: Vol.1. – р.84-85.
Gazzaniga, Michael S. (2012). The Social Brain: Discovering the Networks International Journal, 4 (1), pp.7-16. Gopichandran, R. (2014). Some important facets of science communications. Dream 2047, 15(10), p.35.
Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence Culture. New York, NY: New York University Press, USA. – 308 p.
Kapoor, N. (2012). A science information resource hub for sustainable science communication. In Proceedings of International Conference on Science Communication (pp. 98–103). New Delhi: Communication and Information Resources (NISCAIR), CSIR.
Knorr Cetina, K. (2003). Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2003. – p.310.
Maheshwar, M., Gavaravarapu, S. R. M., Venkaiah, M., & Rao, D. R. (2014). The quality of nutrition research reporting by leading daily newspapers in India. Journal of Media and Communication Studies, 6(6), p.92–98.
Media for Science Forum. (2010). Meta-review: The crisis of media, the relocation of the journalists’ world and the decline of science sections in the context of the Internet communicative and social revolution. Media for Science Forum, 12–13 May 2010, Madrid, Spain. Available on www.mediaforscience.com
Nautiyal, C. M. (2010). Science and science communication in India. In S. Priest (Ed.), The encyclopaedia of science and technology communication / New York, NY: Basic Books. – pp.381–388.
Norman, Kent L. (2017). Cyberpsychology: An Introduction to Human-Computer Interaction. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-10254-5.
Patairiya, M. (2007). Science journalism in India. The Pantaneto Forum Home Page, January 25, 2007. Available on www. pantaneto.co.uk/issue25/patairiya.htm
Patil, S. S., & Kokate, K. D. (2011). Training need assessment of subject matter specialists of Krishi Vigyan Kendras. Indian Research Journal of Extension Education, 11(1), p.19–22.
Phillips, A. (2012). A Creator’s Guide to Transmedia Storytelling: How to Captivate and Engage Audiences Across Multiple Platforms Hardcover. June 23, 288 p.
Rajput, A. S. D. (2008). Science communication: Careers and courses in India. Current Science, 95(11), p.1513. SciLogs in association with Nature.com available on www.scilogs.com
Sciulli, D. (2010). Continental Sociology of Professions Today: Conceptual Contributions// Current Sociology, November 2010.
Vol. 46, №5. p.915-942.
Scolari, C.A. (2009). Transmedia Storytelling: Implicit Consumers, Narrative Worlds and Branding in Contemporary Media Production / C.A. Scolari // International Journal of Communication. Vol. 3. № 4. – p.203-223.
Shankar, A. and Goulding, C. (2001). Interpretive consumer research: Science communication: Careers and courses in India. Current Science, 102(8), p.1415.
Shanton, Karen; Goldman, Alvin (2010). Simulation theory. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science. doi:12.12/ wcs.83. Retrieved 2012-10-09.
Shipman, N. (2012). Scientists: Social media is not necessarily a waste of time. Sympathy. Judgment and Decision Making, 4(4), pp.297-306.
Weingart, P. (2003). Science and the media // Research Policy, 2003, 23 (5). – p.841-863.
Downloads
How to Cite
У.М., Е. (2020). Forms of propaganda and presentation of scientific achievements using media tools. Herald of Journalism, 55(1), 76–85. https://doi.org/10.26577/HJ.2020.v55.i1.08
Issue
Section
World of information
