[jacquesm]

Super good piece. Science has a real PR problem though and that will be hard to fix, the public image of scientists is one that is mostly one of fear and distrust in spite of the visible good that science has done in almost every life.

The media really aren't helping here. If 40 years ago 'being a scientist' was a great thing to aspire to as a kid nowadays you're more likely to hear the same thing about kids wanting to become lawyers or politicians.

Never mind that the lawyers and the politicians are more often than not the anti-pode of constructive contributions to society.

[one-more-minute]

As someone from the UK, I haven't really noticed this. Is it a US thing? (Possibly related to there being less religious thinking in Europe in general?)

I've always felt that as a culture we see STEM degrees as more "real" or valuable than more social subjects (for better or worse), in sharp contrast to historical thinking. On top of that, TV series about science and mathematics (astronomy in particular) only seem to be becoming more common and popular.

[vinay427]

As someone from the US, I think the examples you gave (how degrees are perceived and TV series) also apply here. However, I feel like while STEM qualifications are well-regarded as challenging yet necessary, they have lost some of their glory from a few decades ago during the Cold War, etc. (as portrayed in history textbooks, anyway) when it was more of an immediate national security priority.

[gtf21]

I don't see this image of scientists at all in Europe or the UK. From here, science degrees are by far the most valued, and careers in STEM are viewed favourably.

Where exactly does this "PR problem" come in?

[collyw]

Daily Mail and Express with headlines about "Frankenstein Foods" and such like.Even the more reputable Independent had a "GM Watch" section.

Then there is the global warming "debate". The anti Vaccination crap.

Also the last few years have seen surge in "Everything they said about eating fat / salt /alcohol was wrong".

OK, I have given examples of crap science reporting, but I think the public relate back to it that climate scientists are just after funding. Or that scientists are always wrong. Extrapolate a bit and you will get to where the average Joe is.

Maybe I feel a similarly way about certain religious people. Certainly in the States there seems to be some bug money in that. Its not too hard to see the public's perception of scientists as a mirror image of that.

[spacemanmatt]

Please understand that Daily Mail is nearly their equivalent of The National Enquirer. I wouldn't extrapolate too much from that source, in particular.

[chatwinra]

The latest Ipsos Mori Public Attitudes to Science Survey (2014) is probably worth considering here:

https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharch...

From the summary:

The study shows that the UK public are as enthusiastic about science as they ever have been, with attitudes to science having come a long way over the past 25 years:

-More now agree that “it is important to know about science in my daily life” (72% agree, versus 57% in 1988).

-People are now more comfortable about the pace of change – just a third (34%, versus 49% in 1988) now agree that “science makes people’s lives change too fast”.

- A third (35%) still think that scientists adjust their findings to get the answers they want, and three-in-ten (29%) think scientific research is never or only occasionally checked by other scientists before being published.

- Half (51%) still say they hear and see too little about science.

- Seven-in-ten (69%) think that “scientists should listen more to what ordinary people think” and three-quarters (75%) think that “the Government should act in accordance with public concerns about science and technology”.