Skip to main content

Fiona Fox - Five way interview

Fiona Fox became the founding director of the Science Media Centre in 2001. She has won several awards for her achievements, including an OBE for her services to science in 2014. In 2023 she was elected an honorary member of the Royal Society and holds honorary fellowships from a range of scientific bodies. She writes regular for science publications and national newspapers. Her recent book is Beyond the Hype.

Why science communication?

We have a placard in our office saying ‘if it’s not open it’s not science’. I honestly believe that. The remarkable efforts of scientists to better understand the natural world and human health and find solutions to the biggest problems we face are as nothing if we fail to communicate these to the wider public and policy makers.  Prof Sarah Gilbert, the inventor of the Oxford/AZ vaccine,  hated the media spotlight but understood at some deep level that she needed to communicate directly with the public to ensure that people trusted the vaccine enough to take it.

Why this book?

I’m a news junkie and have read almost every memoir written by journalists and spin doctors like Jeremy Paxman and Alastair Campbell. But they are always about political news.  I feel like the big controversies about science are just as exciting and important as big political crises, but no one has written a science spin doctor's diary. We nearly called it that but I don’t like the word spin so decided against.  I also wanted to write a book to mark the 20th anniversary of the SMC – a unique media relations operation which is being replicated all around the world. And finally I wanted to critique the kind of corporate PR that is on the rise where senior communications officers put the reputation and brand of their organisation before the public interest in the truth.

Despite the SMC being there, we still get plenty of exaggerated or misleading headlines - I know journalists want a splash, but is there anything that can be done about this?

There is not much we can do to stop the day-to-day drive to some level of exaggeration and sensationalism in news rooms.  ‘Twas ever thus.  But we absolutely can do things to limit that and the SMC does - every day.  Sending journalists third party comments on newsworthy new findings which emphasise the caveats and limitations and challenge hype are our bread and butter.  That the news media like these and use the comments in their articles should reassure us that journalists do want to make sure their reports are measured and accurate.  On the whole I am very positive about this. If the news media didn’t care they would simply ignore us. Also don’t assume that the exaggeration always comes from journalists.  We see some horrible examples of scientists and press officers exaggerating their findings, which is less forgivable.  Things like the Press Office labelling system we designed is an anti-hype device for press officers and authors which is making a difference.

What’s next?

More of the same but in different ways. The media has changed in almost every way since we started in 2002 so the core remit stays the same – to improve the quality of science in the news. But we do that by adapting to the changing nature of news.  At the moment we are talking to news organisations about how we help them to drive good science journalism onto social media channels. Also more battles ahead I imagine.  Sadly we see more and more scientists prevented from speaking openly to the media by controlling government communications people or risk averse press officers who urge scientists to stay away from topical controversies.  We need to fight these trends. If you want to see me seething suggest to me that scientists engaging with the news media on topical controversies are ‘fanning the flames’. They are not – they are sharing good quality accurate information with the public when it is most needed.

What’s exciting you at the moment?

The reason I love this job is that loads of things are exciting me.  We know that babies have been born as a result of the new mitochondrial DNA transfer technique (known as babies with 3 parents) so we are waiting for the scientific paper that tells us whether that worked and whether these babies are free from mitochondrial disease.  I also lead here on genome editing in crops and am excited to see what that will allow us to do in terms of getting to Net Zero whilst feeding the world.  I’m also running a one year pilot of an SMC in Ireland.  My parents were from Ireland and my husband is Irish so I’d love to see an SMC there. I’m also loving working with new-ish SMCs in Germany, Spain and Taiwan.  We’re also hoping to have our next global SMCs meeting in Australia in 2025 to coincide the 20th anniversary of the Aus SMC.  It’s so exciting to see that something I set up - that many predicted would never take off - has become a global network making a real difference to science in the media.


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Infinity Machine - Sebastian Mallaby ****

It's very quickly clear that Sebastian Mallaby is a huge Demis Hassabis fan - writing about the only child prodigy and teen genius ever who was also a nice, rounded personality. After a few chapters, though, things settle down (I'm reminded of Douglas Adams' description of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy ) and we get a good, solid trip through the journey that gave us DeepMind, their AlphaGo and AlphaFold programs, the sudden explosion of competition on the AI front and thoughts on artificial general intelligence. Although Mallaby does occasionally still go into fan mode - reading this you would think that AlphaFold had successfully perfectly predicted the structure of every protein, where it is usually not sufficiently accurate for its results to have direct practical application - we get a real feel for the way this relatively unusual company was swiftly and successfully developed away from Silicon Valley. It's readable and gives an important understanding of...
Post a Comment
Read more

In Seach of Sea Dragons - Matthew Myerscough ****

It's common advice to would-be authors of narrative non-fiction to open with something dramatic - Matthew Myerscough certainly does this with the story of his being trapped under an avalanche on Snowdon (while his girlfriend, also carried away remains on top of the snow unhurt). It certainly is dramatic, but seemed entirely disconnected from the reason I got the book, which was to read about fossil collecting.  Luckily, though, in the second chapter we get into a more conventional 'how I got interested in fossils as a boy'. Having recently reviewed Patrick Moore's autobiography and noting that astronomy was one of the few sciences where amateurs can still make a contribution, it came to mind that palaeontology is another - Myerscough is a civil engineer by trade, but just as amateur astronomers can find new details in the skies, so amateur fossil hunters have been searching for these relics for centuries. When I give talks in junior schools, the two topics that guarant...
Post a Comment
Read more

Robot-Proof - Vivienne Ming ****

As Vivienne Ming makes apparent, there seem largely to be two views of AI's pros and cons, both of which are almost certainly wrong. It's either doom-saying 'It'll destroy life as we know it' or Pollyanna-ish 'It'll do all the boring work and we can all be wonderfully creative and live lives of leisure.' Instead, Ming gives us a clear analysis of the likely trajectory for the workplace, particularly for the IT industry. She describes three 'equally flawed, intellectually lazy strategies' to deal with the impact of AI. The first is substitution and deprofessionalisation, using AI to allow cheaper 'AI-augmented technicians' to replace more expensive professionals, producing more low wage jobs and fewer mid-range. This does save money but leaves a company at risk of being easily outcompeted. The second is what Ming describes as the '"A-Player" Hunger Games', the approach favoured by Silicon Valley. This sees the growing rif...
Post a Comment
Read more