This post was originally published on this site
As a former longtime science journalist, I’m happy when I see scientists on TV news. Experts in COVID, climate, renewable energy and AI all help make sense of our fast-changing world.
But I’m also frustrated by the fact that news reporters typically call upon scientist sources only when the news is about science itself. Why don’t reporters more often turn to scientific sources for stories that are not about science but that would be more informative if they included some research-backed context?
Consider some recent polarizing themes in the news: whether books featuring gay or non-binary characters should be excluded from school libraries because of their effects on children; concerns that immigrant job seekers are pushing local wages downward; worries that weapons-heavy video games are contributing to gun violence.
It’s easy to believe that answers to societal controversies like these are inherently matters of ideology or opinion. But social scientists and others have conducted rigorous research on such topics for years. Their findings won’t provide yes or no answers to policy questions. But a close look at the evidence these experts have gathered can help tease apart overly simplistic arguments on both sides of an issue, put false assumptions to rest and clarify possible ways forward.
For example, scientists have found no evidence that reading a book about gay characters will make someone gay. But research does suggest that exposure to gay role models may inspire gay youngsters to come out publicly when they otherwise may not have.
Research has