[Reader-list] Regulation of social worlds: public distrust in science and the role of media

[Shiju Sam Varughese]

Dear Friends, my posting for this month is about the increasing
importance of modern science in our daily life and the emerging
picture of a new 'mass-mediated science'.
We are living in a world where modern science and media are
influencing our daily lives in a deeper manner. It is a 'risk society'
we live in, according to Ulrich Beck (1992. Risk Society: Towards a
New Modernity. London, New Bury Park and New Delhi: Sage). Because of
the presence of risk as a factor in our society, modern science and
technology also turns to be of extreme importance as producer and
regulator of risk. There is a growing public distrust in modern
science because of the risks generated by its applications as well as
due to its failure in managing hazards successfully. Hagendijk ("The
Public Understanding of Science and Public Participation in Regulated
Worlds". Minerva, 42/1:41-59, 2004.) argues that this kind of a new
relationship between publics and modern science in the context of risk
leads to the origin of a new 'mass-mediated science'. Here the
argument is that the making of such a 'new science', wherein publics
are no more merely appreciators of the greatness of modern science but
providing staunch critique of the functioning of S&T, is largely
influenced by the mass media. Hagendijk uses the concept of 'regulated
social world' to understand this peculiar relationship between
science, media, and the publics. The 'social world' is defined by him
as "the constructed and volatile order of everyday life and social
experience" and 'regulation' is used "to stress how everyday life
around the globe has become subject to almost infinite, yet
heterogeneous techno-scientific regulation, standardisation, and
representation" (ibid: 54). Everyday life has been subject to all
sorts of regulation and control and coordination through different
manifestations of science including agriculture, food, health,
education, industry, transport, communication etc. and all of them are
based on scientific knowledge, technical standardisation and
regulation (ibid). He points out that the diversity and heterogeneity
of regulated worlds and their internal inconsistency and opaqueness
demand 'agency' and 'responsibility' from individuals. However, much
of the decision-making related to these issues that affect our daily
life eludes public review and hence the architecture and maintenance
of our regulated worlds are in the hands of scientific, technical and
legal experts (ibid).
In this context the media seems to play a significant role in making
these issues public. Hagendijk opines that most of the citizens start
paying attention to such issues only when it appears in the media and
after that the systems of regulation become subject to public scrutiny
and consequently involve public agencies along with scientific,
technical and legal experts. For him "[t]he mass media and related
forms of communication provide the lenses through which the
disempowered citizens of regulated worlds actually look at themselves.
Regardless of the scepticism one may entertain with respect to the
media as arenas for rational debate and informal communication, mass
media are key vehicles of large-scale reflexive modernisation, turning
citizens and consumers 'on' and 'off' according to new 'logics'"
(ibid: 57-58). Therefore, he contends that research on Public
Understanding of Science should not concentrate merely on public
surveys and ethnographic studies but such studies should be combined
with analyses of science and science-related issues as represented and
narrated by the media. Thus Hagendijk makes it clear that the mounting
distrust and loss of authority of science is because of the changing
institutional configuration of science and a subsequent mass media
involvement in the scientific and technical issues that manifest in
the regulated worlds of people.
Therefore it can be seen that media has an important role in
contemporary science, especially in the context of aggravating
environmental and industrial risks. In Indian context, the emergence
of such a new situation in the context of a growing distrust among the
publics on modern science and its applications began with the Bhopal
Gas tragedy and Narmada Sagar Dam project. The social movements
emerged in the context of such hazards proposed a new politics which
seriously criticised the role of modern science and technology in
creating the disasters. It can be seen that mass media also played a
crucial role in this context. Therefore it is very crucial to
understand and promote the new politics emerging in the context of an
increasing regulation of our social worlds by modern science and
technology.

-- 
shiju sam varughese
15 E Brahmaputra,
Jawaharlal Nehru University,
New Delhi 110 067