Public Expertise Challenged: Scientists’ Views on Hidden Forms of Censorship

• In Event: Science Communication - II: Making Science in Public

Abstract

The media have become an important arena where struggles over the symbolic legitimacy of expert authority take place and where scientific experts increasingly have to compete for public recognition. The rise of authoritarian and populist leaders in many countries and the growing importance of social media have fueled criticism against scientific institutions and individual researchers. Public disparagement of expertise, aggressive online feedback and other forms of external pressure have left academics insecure: some feel that it is better to shut up.
This paper discusses the new hidden forms of censorship and self-censorship regarding scientists’ roles as public experts. It is based on two web surveys conducted among Finnish researchers in 2015 (N=350) and 2017 (N=255). Since the surveys are not representative, we focus on answers on the open-ended questions in these surveys, making over 50 pages of scientists’ reflection on public expertise. Further, we have complemented this data by interviewing ‘visible’ scientists on their views and experiences on freedom of expression and its suppression.
Building on previous research on academic freedom, ‘research silencing’ and the ‘chilling effect’, we discuss the connection between freedom of expression and academic freedom. Our preliminary analysis makes a distinction between four forms of hidden censorship: political and economic control, organizational control, control between rival academics and control from below, e.g. from ordinary citizens. Moreover, we make explicit and discuss the means, motives and practices of hidden censorship within each of these four forms.

Authors

• Esa Tapani Väliverronen, University of Helsinki

• Sampsa Saikkonen, University of Helsinki, Department of Social Research