Science reporters today work within an evolving science media ecosystem that is pluralistic, participatory and social. It is a mostly online environment that has challenged the historically dominant and exceptional role of science reporters as privileged conveyers of specialist information to general audiences. We map this science media environment, drawing on interviews with journalists and writers from nationally prominent US and UK media organizations, describing the shifting roles and emerging practices of science journalists online. Compared to a decade ago, this occupational group, driven by economic imperatives and technological changes, is performing a wider plurality of roles, including those of curator, convener, public intellectual and civic educator, in addition to more traditional journalistic roles of reporter, conduit, watchdog and agenda-setter. Online science journalists have a more collaborative relationship with their audiences and sources and are generally adopting a more critical and interpretative stance towards the scientific community, industry, and policy-oriented organizations.

The European Science Communication Network, between 2005 and 2008, created and delivered original communication training workshops to more than 170 researchers, primarily early-career scientists, to empower them to perform reflexive public engagement activities in various communication situations. The program designed 12 original teaching modules for science communication that not only delivered skills training, including writing for popular audiences and media interview skills, but also developed capacity in, among other areas, risk communication, communicating science in dialogue, and examining controversies within the scientific community. The workshops aimed to encourage scientists to reflect critically on the social, historical, cultural, and ethical dimensions of science.

Largely overlooked by researchers studying the science of science communication are the specific journalistic practices and media structures that might enable more constructive public debate in politicized science controversies. In this commentary, we discuss the role that journalists can play as influential knowledge professionals, drawing on insights from the studies in this section of the special issue. In doing so, we outline three complementary approaches to what Thomas Patterson calls “knowledge-based journalism.” By way of these approaches, journalists and their news organizations can contextualize and critically evaluate expert knowledge; facilitate discussion that bridges entrenched ideological divisions; and promote consideration of a broader menu of policy options and technologies. We conclude by discussing the implications for journalism education.

The communication of chemistry to wider society is difficult because of ‘chemophobia’, its inherent complexity and its lack of unifying grand themes. To engage with citizens about the benefits and related dangers of the field, chemists must improve their dialogue with broader sections of the public — but how?