ABSTRACT

Discussions about the communication of science often rest on an unquestioned assumption that open and efficient channels of communication are always of greatest benefit to both science and society. Increasingly, scientists are urged to maximise their communications by joining large collaborations, increasing their publication rates, sharing their data online, taking part in public outreach events, advising policymakers and talking to the media. Journalists and other media producers, for their part, are often told that they should cover more science, more often and at greater length. Yet too much communication can sometimes become a barrier to effective communication. For instance, a recent overview of efforts to engage the public with science suggests that unreflexive public engagement can close down debate rather than open it up. Despite some successful and productive engagement initiatives, the authors reflect that they now find themselves advising scientists and policymakers ‘how and when not to engage’ (Stilgoe et al., 2014: p. 11). Sometimes it might be best – for the scientific community and for wider society – if scientists stay silent. This book emerges out of a series of AHRC-funded workshops which

aimed to draw attention to the role that silence can play in the communication of science. Contrary to the ideal of science as an open enterprise, scientific innovation relies as much on discontinuities – on barriers and lacunae – as it does on the free flow of information. For instance, the fear of competing research groups stealing ideas can restrict scientists’ willingness to discuss their work openly. Journalists, too, may hold back on a story if publishing could provoke litigation suits or compromise future access to sources. Such closing down of communication can be understood as the production

of silence. Crucially, these silences can communicate in their own right. The silence of a scientist who shuts herself away in her laboratory, for example, could be variously interpreted as signifying hard work, an imminent breakthrough, an uncollegiate attitude or disengagement from society; whatever the interpretation, her silence has carried meaning for those who attend to it. Not all silences have communicative value, but those silences that do communicate have the potential to complement and enhance, rather than just limit, communication through verbal language.