“310_Michael Dolan.ppt”

Annual Conference of the Society for Risk Analysis,

Llubljana, Solvenia – September 2006

“Risk Communication and Perception:building trust amongst scientists, governments, and the

public”

Broadening the risk discussion with political engagement: a series of debates on communicating with the media and the

public on controversial risk issues

Mike Dolan, Executive DirectorMobile Operators Association, UK

www.mobilemastinfo.commikedolan@ukmoa.org

What is the MOA?

www.mobilemastinfo.com

Increase in subscriber demandUK totals 1995 - 2002

Source: industry

Increase in subscriber demandUK totals 1995 - 2005

Source: industry

June 2006

Stakeholder Engagement

• MOA’s objectives are to ensure that its members earn the trust of the community and are recognised and respected as an industry whose actions and approach to the RF health and associated planning issues are responsible and where these issues are discussed in a balanced and objective manner

• MOA’s role includes education of its stakeholders on these issues including new technologies marketed or operated by its members such as 3rd generation mobile technology

Political audiences are key stakeholders requiring active

engagement• Three UK annual political party conferences –

Autumn 2005

• Labour (Government), Conservative (Opposition), Liberal-Democrat (3rd major political party)

• Social Market Foundation appointed – independent think tank

• Series of SMF-chaired one hour debates with published summary booklet

• “Science, Risk and the Media – do the front pages reflect reality?”

Labour Party Conference (1)

• Speakers were Lord Sainsbury (Science Minister), Vivienne Parry (Science Journalist), Vivienne

Nathanson (Head of Science & Ethics, BMA), and Mike Dolan (MOA)

• Ipsos-MORI polling shows 71% of British population believe that the media sensationalise science

• When the media gets it wrong the consequences can be serious (eg MMR – inoculation fell by 20%)

• Problem arises when story moves from science pages to political pages (villains vs good guys)

• Public needs to be engaged by governments and not just regulated

Labour Party Conference (2)

• The front pages reflect reality for the public not the scientists

• Everyday miracles of science do not make the front pages – journalists only like to write about controversial science

• Stories can have a political agenda (eg MMR and the British Prime Minister)

• The British public is addicted to risk and worries about new technology

• The British public is swayed by anecdote – nothing to do with science itself

Conservative Party Conference (1)

• Speakers were Andrew Lansley MP (Shadow Health Secretary), David Ball (Professsor of Risk Management), and Mike Dolan (MOA)

• Public confidence in science has seriously declined in the past decade (BSE debacle)

• This has given rise to a self-sustaining scepticism which devalues science and scientists

• Policy makers need to champion scientists in order to retain them

• Scientists need to engage in public debate and be challenged by Ministers where necessary

Conservative Party Conference (2)

• Scientists are professionals, not policy makers – their role is to interpret and advise

• Media coverage always seems to want to apply the precautionary principle

• 70-80% of people get their scientific information from the media

• Media has an obligation to provide a balanced view for its audiences

• In the UK the Science Media Centre has been an invaluable media resource (www.sciencemediacentre.org)

Liberal-Democrat Conference (1)

• Speakers were Sandra Gidley MP (Health Spokesperson), Evan Harris MP (medical doctor), Vivienne Nathanson (Head of Science and Ethics, BMA), and Mike Dolan (MOA)

• Scary headlines can create huge hurdles for health professionals

• Political journalists rarely have a good understanding of science

• In the UK there is a war – science vs anti-science, eg MMR

• The precautionary principle should mean proceeding with caution in a research-based way, simply saying “No” is wrong

Liberal-Democrat Conference (2)

• Editorial policy can be responsible for misleading science stories

• Headlines by sub-editors can entirely change the thrust of a story

• There is a continuing gap between what the media reports and what scientists are saying

• The peer review process needs to be better understood especially by the media

• Accurate communication on science issues is very important for society

Over-arching themes from the three debates

• Cross party consensus that policy must be based

on sound scientific evidence

• Journalists should aim for greater balance in their reporting

• The public and policy community need a greater knowledge of science

• The precautionary principle needs to be applied with proportionality

• Politicians need to respond quickly to media scare stories

A Final Word

“Restoring confidence in science will not happen suddenly by gimmicky solutions, such as having the ‘public’ decide what is worthwhile research, or treating lay opinion as just as valuable as experts …….. openness and honesty provide the key to trust”

Lord DickTaverne, Chair, Science About ScienceForeward, SMF Booklet, February 2006

Booklet

“Science, Risk and the Media – do the front pages reflect reality?”

Published by the Social Market FoundationFebruary 2006

ISBN: 1-904899-40-4

Website: www.smf.co.uk