Like we all discussed in the previous calls, there is now a layer of exclusivity within the discipline of science. There are doers & speakers who present their work to the listeners. The facilitation of communication is called Science Communication.
However, it is evident that there exists a power structure with the way science is communicated to the public. Ideally, the public should have some sort of interaction, a two-way street which nurtures into a relationship between the public and science. This is how public engagement is different from science communication. There is no more “you listen, I’ll speak” but rather a channel of interaction between everyone and science.
An interesting conversation that we delved into was whether the target audience is “public” or a group of “publics”.
A general audience or a way of thinking where you consider everyone else as one group os people can be referred to as the larger “public”. However, segregation on the basis of socio-economic factors can lead to a hyper-specific understanding of the audience which can help you make a better impact in your program.
Essentially, impact and your segregation of target audiences is a trade-off. Do you want to hit 40,000 people or connect deeply with 4?
