You should have seen the room light up in a eureka moment when Bibiana Iraki, Senior Programs Officer at ISAAA AfriCenter, told gathered experts that they could, indeed, give “I don’t know” as an answer to a media question.
They had always known to fumble for answers, to keep sounding knowledgeable, and to stay put atop that pedestal even when some information was at the moment out of reach.
Gathered for a two-day science communication training, Kenya’s biosafety regulators and government technocrats were baffled by many other nuggets of advice from National Biosafety Authority (NBA) and The AfriCenter’s communication trainers, and the entirety of the period, by their accounts, was “eye-opening”.
When Dr Margaret Karembu, ISAAA AfriCenter’s Director, pointed out the difference between communication and sharing out information, there were glances among participants that gave them away; most of them admitted later they have been doing the latter.
The training was meant to familiarize participants with principles of effective science communication, help them identify appropriate stakeholders for their communication purposes, enhance their skills in message development and delivery, equip them with effective media relations skills, and help them with fact-checking skills (and addressing misinformation).
The participants in the room were reminded of the need to take a lead in passing accurate information about their work to the public as the most proactive way to combat misinformation and disinformation. Yet, many confessed, they found unease talking to journalists. For this reason, anti-science groups and pseudoscientists come zooming into public awareness, and facts quickly get distorted, or torpedoed altogether.
Kenya’s NBA CEO Dr Roy Mugiira spoke about- and reiterated- the importance of communication that speaks and appeals to the layman, spoken with clarity and compassion.
“The public needs to understand what we are saying, and that is why NBA has a communication strategy that has been approved by the board and will be implemented to increase public understanding of the Authority’s role,” he said.
He also emphasized the need for additional interventions, such as regular analysis of stakeholders’ knowledge and awareness levels, and the creation of an elaborate program that facilitates training for scientists on communication (and communicators in science) to facilitate trust in biosafety decisions.
As they wound up, the participants had an improved understanding of spotting fake news, countering damaging preexisting beliefs, noticing conflict of interest and dealing with political activism.
“Let us steer clear of jargons, and also climb down this ivory tower that prevents us from breaking down technical information,” Dr Karembu said. A good parting shot for, as they climbed down the room’s stairs, they looked very determined, eager even, to put their newly gained knowledge to action.