On February 25, 2025, IANUS partner Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), under the direction of Dana Mahr (KIT-ITAS), organized the workshop “Journalism’s Impact on Public Trust in Science.” Held in Berlin, the event gathered researchers, journalists, and practitioners to discuss the role of media in shaping public perceptions of science, as well as the challenges posed by misinformation and digital transformations in the media landscape. It provided an interdisciplinary forum for examining the relationship between journalism and scientific communication.
Dana Mahr opened the workshop by situating the discussions within the larger framework of the IANUS project. She outlined the evolving role of journalism in mediating scientific discourse and emphasized the need for critical media engagement in an era of information overload and misinformation. Drawing on insights from the IANUS media panels, Mahr highlighted key challenges and opportunities in contemporary science communication in different European contexts. She underlined the urgent need for interdisciplinary collaboration to ensure accurate and responsible dissemination of scientific knowledge.
The event opened with a keynote lecture on “Investigative Journalism and Scientific Integrity.” Investigative journalist Brian Deer delivered an in-depth presentation on his investigative work uncovering fraudulent scientific claims, focusing on the infamous 1998 study by Andrew Wakefield that falsely linked the MMR vaccine to autism. Deer’s meticulous investigation revealed that Wakefield had manipulated data and failed to disclose significant conflicts of interest, leading to widespread public fear and a decline in vaccination rates. Deer’s findings were instrumental in the full retraction of the original study by The Lancet in 2010 and Wakefield’s subsequent removal from the UK medical register. The ensuing discussion delved into the critical role of investigative journalism in exposing scientific misconduct, the ethical responsibilities journalists bear when reporting on complex scientific issues, and the broader impact such exposés have on restoring public trust in scientific research.
Afterwards, the first session, “Journalism and Science – Prospects for Collaboration” saw political Journalist Katja Thorwarth and Dr. Moritz Post (author, journalist, media critic) explore the complex relationship between journalism and academia, focusing on the potential for constructive collaboration while acknowledging the inherent tensions that can arise in communicating scientific knowledge to the public. The discussion examined the expectation that journalism should present an objective and accurate representation of scientific advancements, while also recognizing the constraints imposed by editorial priorities, economic pressures, and the evolving media landscape. A significant point of discussion was the politicization of science in media representations and how such framing influences public perception. The session further emphasized strategies for fostering more effective engagement between journalists and scientists, advocating for greater transparency, accessibility, and mutual understanding in science communication.
Session two was centered around “Whistleblowers, Science, and Public Credibility” and explored the role of whistleblowers in exposing scientific misconduct and other issues of public concern. Patrick Reitz (whistleblower, former event technician) shared insights from his own experience and discussed the broader legal and ethical framework for whistleblower protection. The discussion included an examination of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs), the impact of digital media on whistleblowing, and the evolving role of social media as a platform for disseminating information outside traditional journalistic channels. Session three, “Disinformation on Social Media – Challenges and Responsibilities” delved into the proliferation of disinformation on social media and its detrimental impact on public trust in science, particularly in relation to transgender healthcare. Journalist and Trans activist Janka Kluge highlighted how social media platforms, particularly X/Twitter, have become arenas where anti-trans narratives and misinformation flourish, leading to widespread misconceptions about transgender healthcare and identities. She highlighted the role of algorithms in amplifying such misleading content, as these systems often prioritize engagement over accuracy, inadvertently promoting sensationalist and harmful narratives. Kluge also discussed the limitations of current platform moderation policies, noting that they often fail to effectively curb the spread of transphobic misinformation. She shared her personal approach to addressing these challenges, which involves engaging in dialogue with people who hold opposing views. Despite the emotional toll, Kluge believes that open conversations can build understanding and potentially reduce the spread of misinformation. The session highlighted the need to improve digital literacy to enable users to critically evaluate online information. It also called for the development of more robust moderation policies by social media platforms to combat the spread of harmful content, thereby fostering a more informed and inclusive public discourse.
The following session, “Trust in Science in a Post-Election Context,” saw Stephan Anpalagan, a German theologian, journalist, and managing director of the non-profit consultancy Demokratie in Arbeit, examining the ways in which political discourse influences public trust in science, particularly in the wake of Germany’s recent federal elections. The central theme of his talk was the role of xenophobia and exclusionary rhetoric in shaping societal divisions, including its impact on scientific debates. Anpalagan highlighted how political narratives can reinforce public skepticism toward expert knowledge, contributing to the erosion of trust in scientific institutions. He underscored the increasing entanglement of scientific facts with ideological positions, demonstrating how discussions on climate policy, public health, and social justice often become battlegrounds for political identity rather than spaces for evidence-based decision-making. The discussion also examined the responsibilities of scientists, journalists, and policymakers in counteracting these trends by fostering inclusive, transparent, and fact-based communication in public discourse.
Session four, on the other hand, focused on “Expertise, Authority, and Addressing Misinformation.” Silvio Duwe, a reporter for ARD’s investigative program Kontraste, addressed the ethical responsibilities journalists bear when reporting on scientific topics, particularly in the context of sensitive health-related issues. Duwe drew upon Kontraste’s investigative work concerning claims about “Vaccine-Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome” (VAIDS), a purported condition suggesting that COVID-19 vaccinations could lead to immune system deficiencies. This concept has been widely discredited by the scientific community. Kontraste’s reporting critically examined the origins and dissemination of such misinformation, highlighting the role of certain legal professionals in promoting unfounded fears about vaccine safety. The session underscored the necessity for journalists to possess a robust understanding of scientific principles to effectively counteract misinformation. It also emphasized the importance of adhering to ethical standards that prioritize public health and informed discourse, especially in an era where misinformation can rapidly proliferate through digital platforms.
The final presentation discussed “AI and Journalism.” IANUS partners Eva Paraschou and Maria Michali (Aristotle University of Thessaloniki) introduced an AI-driven methodology for analyzing political discourse, applied during the 2023 Greek elections. This collaborative project, conducted with iMEdD (incubator for Media Education and Development), utilized advanced AI models, including OpenAI’s ChatGPT, to perform algorithmic analyses on pre-election speeches delivered by six Greek political party leaders. The analysis focused on identifying prevalent topics, assessing sentiment, and evaluating levels of polarization and populism within the speeches. The project aimed to provide a comprehensive understanding of the political landscape and to evaluate the efficacy of large language models in political speech analysis. The discussion highlighted the capabilities of AI in processing and analyzing large volumes of political text, offering insights into rhetorical strategies and public messaging. However, it also emphasized the limitations of AI, particularly concerning contextual understanding and potential biases inherent in language models. The presenters underscored the necessity of human oversight to interpret AI-generated data accurately, ensuring that automated content analysis tools are used responsibly and effectively in journalistic practices.
To conclude the event, a closing panel on “Public Trust in Science” examined contemporary challenges and future directions for researchers and media practitioners. Contributions by Rebecca Richter (legal expert in fake news), Christopher Coenen (political scientist, KIT–ITAS), Alfonso Pantisano (civil rights activist, Queer Berlin Liaison Officer of the Berlin Senate) and Andrej Reisin (media critic, “Funk,” Übermedien, Tagesschau, Zapp) summarized key themes from the workshop, discussing practical measures to reinforce public trust in science. The conversation highlighted legal approaches to misinformation, ethical frameworks for journalism, and strategies for enhancing engagement between scientific institutions and the wider public.
Visual storyteller Miriam Barton provided the closing reflections on the workshop’s discussions by summarizing the core insights and highlighting key takeaways. Through her graphic recording, Barton visually mapped out the central themes explored throughout the event, capturing the complexities of science communication, the role of journalism in fostering trust, and the broader societal impact of misinformation.
Overall, the workshop provided a comprehensive examination of the role of journalism in shaping public trust in science, bringing together experts from the media, academia and policy-making to discuss current challenges. Through case studies, investigative reports and expert discussions, the event highlighted the responsibility of journalists to accurately communicate scientific information while addressing misinformation and public skepticism.
Lessons learned from the workshop directly contribute to the IANUS project’s goals of promoting media transparency, improving science communication strategies and encouraging responsible public engagement with scientific discourse. As scientific knowledge continues to intersect with social, political and digital transformations, strengthening trust in science remains a dynamic and collective effort.
The outcomes of this event will serve as a basis for future interdisciplinary collaboration and encourage further dialogue between journalists, scientists and policy makers to develop sustainable solutions for strengthening scientific credibility in the public sphere.