Visible research

In 1919, Max Planck was convinced "that pure science is inherently unpopular". The "struggle with the brittle material" required a level of concentration that "must remain completely incomprehensible to any outsider". This may have been true in Planck's day. However, his prediction that it would always remain so proved to be wrong. "I would counter this with the title of a Spiegel article a few years ago, 'Science is sexy'," says Roman Klingler, Head of News and Media Office at ETH Zurich. "Today, different sections of the population are interested in science if it is communicated in an appealing, understandable and dialogical form. " Numerous new and popular science programs such as "Einstein, Quarks & Co" or "Galileo" prove him right.

How science became popular

On the part of publishers and editors-in-chief, the interest arose virulently in the 1960s in the context of the discussion about nuclear power plants, recalls Rosmarie Waldner, founder of the Swiss Club for Science Journalism (SKWJ) and (now retired) science journalist. A key trigger was the nuclear accident at Lucens in 1969. As a result, Waldner was offered her first job as a science journalist at the Tages-Anzeiger. The decision of the editor-in-chief at the time proved to be far-sighted. In the years that followed, there were also disputes on the political stage about genetic engineering and animal testing. The Neue Zürcher Zeitung (NZZ) had already launched a science supplement at the beginning of the century, but science reporting really became established in most daily newspapers at the end of the 1980s, says Waldner.

Journalists fear cutbacks

In view of the latest developments at Tamedia, the SKWJ now fears a trend in the opposite direction. After its own knowledge section disappeared from the SonntagsZeitung in the spring (it was integrated into the society section), the media company is now announcing a merger of several sections of the Tages-Anzeiger and SonntagsZeitung. In addition to society and culture, the knowledge section is also affected. The SKWJ is reacting to the two changes with an open letter to the Tamedia management. In it, SKWJ President Olivier Dessibourg calls on the media companies to provide the necessary resources for journalism "that is not content with being the mouthpiece of science". Although the new department will be "one of the largest in Switzerland with around ten jobs" according to Tamedia's press release, the science journalist from Le Temps is convinced that the merger is motivated by cost-cutting measures and means a de facto reduction. He also fears that Swiss science journalism will only speak with one voice on controversial topics instead of two, sometimes different ones.
 
Tamedia media spokesman Christoph Zimmer relativizes the fear of a dwindling diversity of opinion. The new knowledge section will have a co-head consisting of the two previous heads of the Tages-Anzeiger and SonntagsZeitung sections, Matthias Meili and Nik Walter (who recently won the 2014 Prix Média of the Academies of Sciences and Humanities for his article "Schlampereien im Tierlabor"). There are simply different reader needs for the two titles and these will also be taken into account in the future. Zimmer does not deny that the collaboration is intended to save money. However, he emphasizes that the merger is primarily intended to bundle existing strengths. "In view of the clear decline in advertising sales, an editorial team must use its resources in a very targeted manner in order to continue to offer a good product. The advantage of a merger is that we can retain our dossier expertise." The plan is for individual departments to work together, as has been the case in the sports section since Sonntags Zeitung was founded. There will be no redundancies as part of the current merger. However, Zimmer confirms that a member of staff will change departments within the SonntagsZeitung. In addition, one position will not be filled next year due to retirement.

When the SonntagsZeitung's own knowledge section was discontinued this spring, this had no consequences in terms of personnel. The topic is not given any less space within the overarching Society section. "However, if you don't have your own association, you have to fight for space," Dessibourg is convinced. For Waldner, there is a second important reason for having a separate section: "You should signal that so-called serious knowledge corresponds to a genuine public interest - society, on the other hand, also includes gossip stories or fashion trends." Except perhaps for very large newspapers or television programs, the science section is still just "nice to have" - despite the immense importance of research for Switzerland as a business location, Dessibourg notes. The SKWJ's accusations are "only comprehensible to a limited extent", disagrees Zimmer, as science is considered to be of great importance. They are meeting with growing reader interest. In particular, topics at the interface between ethics and science are in demand. "Socio-political discussions that go beyond the mere communication of science will certainly increase in the coming years." 

Research depends on acceptance

Science journalism no longer leads a niche existence in Switzerland. However, it is confronted with a scientific community that has much more extensive financial resources at its disposal than it did a few decades ago. Dessibourg, who worked for the press service of the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) between July 2002 and April 2004, was part of a team of eight at the time, which has since been increased to around 14 employees. There are many reasons for this. "There is a battle for visibility between the individual educational institutions. It now also plays a decisive role in the allocation of funding," says Dessibourg. Waldner emphasizes that the pharmaceutical and agro-industry upgraded their PR departments when opposition to genetic engineering arose. "Industry and universities feel compelled to create acceptance for their own research." Many universities have a wide range of print and online products for this purpose. ETH Zurich operates its own science blog in addition to a news platform. Researchers have been reporting on climate change on the ETH climate blog since 2009. Last fall, the portal was renamed Zukunftsblog and now highlights various sustainability topics ranging from climate and sustainable urban development to global nutrition. "The blog offers researchers the opportunity to write about their core competencies in a personal and credible way. The sender is absolutely transparent," says Klingler. The portal attracts the attention of specialist journalists and is an important source of ideas for the media.

For Waldner, the future blog is "well done, but pure PR". The negative aspects of research are never pointed out on such a portal. "We are aware that we cannot and do not want to play the same role as a journalist," says Klingler. However, in view of politicians and taxpayers who want to know whether the money spent is being invested wisely, the achievements in research and teaching must be made visible. Public events such as the Science City meeting point or Scientifica would enable direct discussions between students and researchers and the people of Zurich. "A university does not operate in a vacuum and is dependent on social acceptance," Klingler is convinced.

For Waldner, the population's need for co-determination is linked not least to the huge explosion of science. "The centuries-old authorities are crumbling because many people today have a scientific background and are therefore observing the research process more critically." At universities, too, you now encounter experts who are divided about nuclear energy or genetic engineering. Dessibourg is convinced that it is possible to point out the relevant aspects of research to a reader from outside the field. This was the case, for example, with the 1998 vote on the 1993 genetic protection initiative. In contrast to genetic research, however, there are other areas of science on which no one would call for a referendum because they are still in the dark for the population.

Simone Isliker