Although women represent almost half of the research staff in Spain, only one in three expert voices that appear in the media when talking about science corresponds to a scientist. Globally, according to data from the Global Media Monitoring Project (GMMP), the proportion is even smaller and they only represent one in four expert voices.
In order to deepen the understanding of this inequality, the Spanish Foundation for Science and Technology (FECYT) published on Tuesday a report on the media situation with the participation of journalists, scientists and scientific involved in this process. The work, prepared from a series of surveys conducted by the Science Media Center Spain (SMC) In collaboration with the Gureiker research group, from the University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), it aims to know what factors influence when participating in the media as expert sources.
The result, from 649 surveys, shows a small bias within the SMC itself, because in 56 % of the occasions they asked for opinions from male experts compared to 43.91 % in experts. The difference was even more enlarged to there was a lower participation rate between them, because of the total number of people who accepted the SMC proposals and finally appeared as sources, 37.66 % were women and 62.34 % men (a ratio consistent with that 1/3 ratio that show other studies).
A vicious circle
The work, led by Maider Eizmendi (UPV/EHU) and presented by the Minister of Science and Universities, Diana Morant, concludes that the greatest media exposure of scientific men benefits them in view of future interventions: one of the motivations of journalists when contacting the Sources is that they have previously accepted a proposal. In addition, scientists show a greater predisposition than scientists to accept SMC proposals to be informative sources: 26.3% of the men consulted accepted, compared to 20.3% of women.
Regarding what drives them to participate in the media as sources, the proportion of women who do it because they believe it is part of their work is greater (91.67% compared to 75.47%), the number of scientists who They make knowledge to the public is also greater, while among scientists the individual benefit for their academic career (18.87% compared to 5.56% of them).
Among the most prominent aspects by the authors are the barriers to participate in the media: the lack of time due to conciliation issues affects more than double scientists (22.95%) than scientists (10%), a factor that It has a greater impact on the investigating personnel with less experience.
More prudence, less exhibition
“Indeed, we always end up speaking more with men than women,” he acknowledges Verónica Pavésscientific journalist of The daywhich has not participated in the study. “In my experience, they are more The recurrence factor mentioned by the study is also interesting. “As we have previously contacted a man who has told us that, we usually talk more with them, because we already know they will answer us.”
In my experience, they are more
Verónica Pavés
– Scientific journalist of El Día
“For them, presenting their own media research has never been a problem, but commenting on scientific articles from third parties has cost them more than them,” he says Eva Caballerojournalist and presenter of Caracol mechanicsin Radio Euskadi. Caballero also appreciates a greater reservation in scientists when talking about topics that are not of their field of work, although he believes that they are increasingly encouraged to participate in the media.
TO Victoria Toroscientific journalist and responsible for communication of the Association of Researchers and Technologists (Amit), it is not surprised that scientists praise their negatives to participate as sources. “We all know that care exercises them to women,” he says, referring to the latest CIS survey (January 2024), indicating that Women dedicate twice as many time to children that men.
For them, presenting their own media research has never been a problem, but commenting on scientific articles of third parties has cost them more than them
Eva Caballero
– Journalist and presenter of the Mechanics of Caracol
To tackle this problem, the Amit developed a database to provide scientific expert journalists in all fields. “At this time there are 4,052 registered researchers,” explains Toro. “We know that it is used a lot, but we have no system to measure it, although we do see that in the strongest or most professional media more and more scientists are cited and the gap is reduced.”
Toro highlights the importance of studies like this, which allow to see things that work badly and look for ways to change them and get a more fair system. “Yes, it is surprised that the important social rejection that women who are publicly exposed that the men who do the same,” says, although this issue had been discussed in an previous study of the SMC and FECYT.
Journalistic inertia
Marcela Campos-RuedaDoctor of Media Research from the Carlos III University (UC3M) that has been analyzing this phenomenon in depth for years, believes that it is a very valuable study, although unfortunately it only confirms what we already know. “What catches my attention is that things do not change,” he explains to eldiario.es. “The media return us a much more unequal image than what is in society, as a frozen photo in time.” In fact, he points out, the numbers are compensated only by the presence of women in political spokesmen and public office, a success that, in his opinion, is a consequence of positive discrimination.
I would not focus on the journalist who does not call women or the scientist who feels that she is not prepared; Because all this is a structural issue
Marcela Campos-Rueda
– Carlos III University Researcher (UC3M)
The bias is so internalized in society, remembered Campos-Rueda in a Recent conferencethat if we see in a text that P. Pérez thinks, we think that it is one Pedro before considering that it could be Patricia. “Inequality is often due to situations closely linked to journalistic routines,” he says. “Journalists work with few resources and little time, they pull the agenda of their classmates or what others have published before.”
In addition to measuring and seeing that we are doing it wrong, Campos-Rueda believes that you have to put resources and support the writings and the means so that this does not happen. “I think the cause are systemic biases,” he concludes. “I would take away the individual’s responsibility, I would not focus on the journalist who does not call women or the scientist who feels that he is not prepared; Because all this is a structural issue and we have to work to overcome it, establish routines to consult more expert women and dedicate resources so that it does not continue to happen. ”
#scientific #expert #voices #inequality #media #society
