Medical Knowledge, Public Trust and Expert Communication: The Online Debate in Times of Polycrisis

The credibility of scientific and expert knowledge is increasingly being questioned, a weakening of trust that has its roots before the polycrisis escalates in the early 2020s - Covid-19 pandemic, war in Europe and in the Middle East (Eslen-Ziya and Giorgi, 2022; Safford et al., 2021). This research critically discusses the role of science communicators through two case studies: the analysis of the online debate on Covid-19 in Italy and UK, and the case of a popularizer on social media. The underlying research objective is to outline and discuss the dynamics behind the complex interplay among scientists, mass media and public at a time of uncertainty and disillusionment (Eurobarometer, 2024; Gobo et al., 2023).

Following a grounded theory approach, the material collected through two online ethnographies was subjected to thematic analysis starting with an encoding of extracted text segments. Emerging results highlight the impact of communication on public trust, emphasizing the need for popularizers to adopt a less confrontational approach. In this regard, scientific discourse should be more sympathetic to misgivings and hesitations in public opinion, avoiding moralistic tones, and using clear and sincere messages, tailored for diverse audiences, and shared by trusted people.

The reflections elicited by the two cases suggest that a more inclusive and transparent approach could bridge the gap between experts and the public, fostering a more constructive debate on science. This means communicating not only scientific knowledge, but also how science works and why science in the particular case meets the standards of competence, reliability and public interest. The findings of this study could be useful for exploratory purposes with a view to future research on the communication strategies chosen by science and academic communicators to address an increasingly skeptical and interactive audience.