IANUS Media Panels: coding tables developed from focus groups with science journalists

Media Panel Observations regarding trust in science along the topics of Covid19,Transgender Medicine, Climate Change (Germany) Focus Group Shifts in Public Trust in Science since the Pandemic COVID-19 Transgender Medicine Climate Change 1 Noted increased skepticism fueled by misinformation; calls for transparency and accurate reporting Noted mixed messages from scientific experts and political leaders; misinformation amplified distrust Mentioned controversies and lack of consensus within scientific community / society since Cass Report. High consciousness about the topic. need for inclusive and empathetic reporting – including transgender voices. Discussed challenges in conveying urgency and complexity of climate science 2 Discussed growing skepticism; emphasized importance of transparency and long-term engagement strategies, noted conflict of interest with regard to own double function (journalist and science center) Highlighted confusion caused by evolving scientific understanding; misinformation eroded trust Addressed lack of understanding and misinformation; emphasized need for accurate reporting Emphasized skepticism fueled by political agendas and misinformation 3 Emphasized challenges in maintaining trust amidst conflicting loyalties; advocated for accountability and critical self-reflection, noted conflict of interest with regard to own double function (journalist and MPI outreach) Discussed politicization of scientific advice; highlighted role of media in exacerbating distrust Addressed skepticism towards medical institutions; emphasized need for transparent reporting Stressed importance of transparency and credibility in scientific institutions 4 Advocated for transparency and reflexivity in reporting; discussed importance of balancing journalistic integrity Mentioned conflicting narratives from scientific institutions; highlighted role of social media in spreading misinformation Noted controversies and debates affecting the medical community from outside actors; called for accurate and inclusive reporting Highlighted skepticism towards scientific consensus and perceived biases in reporting. Alternative media / social media problem 5 Addressed challenges in combating misinformation; emphasized need for education and critical thinking skills Highlighted role of political interference in undermining trust; advocated for transparent communication Discussed controversies and lack of consensus; emphasized importance of accurate and empathetic Mentioned skepticism towards scientific consensus and influence of vested reporting. More voices of “detransitioners” and parents of transgender youth should be heard. interests. Alternative “knowledge networks” 6 Highlighted importance of transparent and nuanced communication; advocated for responsible reporting Emphasized importance of consistent messaging and transparent decision-making processes Mentioned lack of understanding and misinformation; emphasized need for inclusive and empathetic reporting Discussed challenges in conveying urgency and complexity; emphasized role of misinformation and vested interests 7 Discussed erosion of trust due to misinformation; emphasized need for rigorous and responsible reporting Mentioned conflicting advice from scientific experts; highlighted role of media in spreading misinformation Emphasized need for accurate and empathetic reporting; discussed controversies within medical community Addressed skepticism towards scientific consensus and perceived biases in reporting 8 Emphasized importance of transparency and integrity; discussed challenges in navigating conflicting loyalties and responsibilities Discussed controversies and conflicting advice from scientific institutions; called for transparent communication Mentioned controversies and lack of understanding; emphasized need for inclusive and accurate reporting Highlighted skepticism towards scientific consensus and perceived biases in reporting 9 Advocated for responsible reporting and critical self-reflection; discussed challenges in maintaining credibility and trust amidst misinformation Highlighted politicization of scientific advice; emphasized need for transparent communication Discussed controversies manufactured consent through gender critical actors; emphasized importance of accurate and empathetic reporting giving real experts more voice Addressed skepticism towards scientific consensus and perceived biases in reporting 10 Addressed need for accurate and accessible information; emphasized role of education and critical thinking skills Mentioned conflicting advice from scientific institutions; highlighted role of social media in spreading misinformation Emphasized importance of accurate and empathetic reporting; discussed controversies within medical community Discussed skepticism towards scientific consensus and influence of vested interests 11 Highlighted importance of transparency and reflexivity; discussed challenges in navigating conflicting interests and maintaining trust Noted mixed messages from scientific institutions; highlighted role of media in spreading misinformation Discussed controversies and lack of consensus; emphasized need for inclusive and accurate reporting Emphasized skepticism towards scientific consensus and perceived biases in reporting 12 Advocated for responsible reporting and transparency; emphasized need for education and critical thinking Mentioned conflicting advice from scientific experts; highlighted role of social media in spreading misinformation Addressed controversies and lack of understanding; emphasized importance of accurate non-partisan reporting Discussed skepticism towards scientific consensus and influence of vested interests 13 Emphasized importance of transparency and integrity; discussed challenges in maintaining credibility and trust amidst misinformation Highlighted politicization of scientific advice; emphasized need for transparent communication Discussed controversies and lack of consensus Addressed skepticism towards scientific consensus and perceived biases in reporting 14 Discussed erosion of trust due to misinformation; emphasized need for rigorous and responsible reporting Mentioned conflicting narratives from scientific institutions; highlighted role of social media in spreading misinformation Noted controversies and debates outside the medical community affecting gender care; gender-critical positions within the scientific community should get more room. Nobody of the legacy media has reported about the WPATH Files Highlighted skepticism towards scientific consensus and perceived biases in reporting 15 Highlighted importance of transparent and nuanced communication; advocated for responsible reporting Emphasized importance of consistent messaging and transparent decision-making processes Discussed controversies and lack of consensus; emphasized need for inclusive and empathetic reporting Mentioned skepticism towards scientific consensus and influence of vested interests 16 Advocated for transparency and reflexivity in reporting; discussed importance of balancing institutional loyalty and journalistic integrity Noted conflicting narratives from scientific institutions; highlighted role of social media in spreading misinformation Discussed skepticism towards medical institutions; emphasized need for transparent reporting Stressed importance of transparency and credibility in scientific institutions 17 Addressed challenges in combating misinformation; emphasized need for education and critical thinking skills Highlighted role of political interference in undermining trust; advocated for transparent communication Noted controversies and debates within medical community; called for accurate and inclusive reporting Emphasized skepticism towards scientific consensus and perceived biases in reporting 18 Discussed growing skepticism; emphasized importance of transparency and long-term engagement strategies Highlighted confusion caused by evolving scientific understanding; misinformation eroded trust Addressed lack of understanding and misinformation; emphasized need for accurate reporting mphasized skepticism fueled by political agendas and misinformation 19 Emphasized challenges in maintaining trust amidst conflicting loyalties; advocated for accountability and critical self-reflection Discussed politicization of scientific advice; highlighted role of media in exacerbating distrust Addressed skepticism towards medical institutions - Perspectives and findings of 19 focus groups of science journalists regarding shifts in the public's trust in science since the pandemic, with a focus on trust/distrust in scientific institutions regarding COVID-19, transgender medicine, and climate change Sampling (Germany) Focus Group Gender Composition Number of Participants Experience in the Field Media Organization / Organization 1 Mixed 4 Beginner University Student Newspaper 2 Female only 3 Experienced Advanced Science Center 3 Mixed 3 Experienced Max Planck Institute 4 Male only 2 Experienced National Newspaper 5 Mixed 4 Experienced Alternative media 6 Mixed 3 Beginner Regional newspaper 7 Mixed 5 Varied/Experienced Online media 8 Mixed 4 Varied National newspaper 9 Mixed 2 Beginner/Experienced Online media 10 Mixed 4 Experienced Regional newspaper 11 Mixed 3 Varied/Experienced National newspaper 12 Mixed 2 Beginner Online media 13 Mixed 5 Varied/Experienced Online media 14 Mixed 3 Beginner/Experienced Online media, Alternative media 15 Mixed 2 Varied National newspaper 16 Mixed 4 Experienced Regional newspaper 17 Mixed 3 Beginner/Experienced Online media 18 Mixed 5 Varied/Experienced National newspaper 19 Mixed 2 Varied Regional newspaper This table shows the composition of the media panels / focus groups held in Germany between November 2023 and April 2024. Themes and Engagement in MPs (Germany) Theme FG 1 FG 2 FG 3 FG 4 FG 5 FG 6 FG 7 FG 8 FG 9 FG 10 FG 11 FG 12 FG 13 FG 14 FG 15 FG 16 FG 17 FG 18 FG 19 Misinfor mation Addresse d Noted Discuss ed Highlig hted Mentio ned Empha sized Brough t up Empha sized Discu ssed Discus sed Discuss ed Discus sed Discuss ed Discuss ed Discus sed Transpar ency Emphasi zed Stresse d Advoca ted Stresse d Advoca ted Empha sized Advoca ted Empha sized Discu ssed Empha sized Education Advocat ed Highlig hted Advoca ted Empha sized Empha sized Empha sized Empha sized Empha sized Empha sized Critical Thinking Advocat ed Empha sized Empha sized Discuss ed Generativ e AI Ethical consider ations Highlig hted Discuss ed Discuss ed Journalist ic Integrity Addresse d Empha sized Navigat ed Empha sized Empha sized Conflic ted roles Conflic ted roles Institutio nal Changes Noted Conflic ted roles Mentio ned Empha sized Stresse d Stresse d Longterm Engagem ent Advoca ted Advoca ted Advoca ted Discus sed Public Engagem ent Advocat ed Advoca ted Advoca ted Advoca ted Advoca ted Advoca ted Advoc ated Diversity & Inclusivit y Emphasi zed Advoca ted Advoca ted Advoc ated Advoca ted Advoc ated Advoca ted Advoca ted Advoc ated Reflexivit y Empha sized Empha sized Empha sized Discu ssed Stresse d Ethical Reporting Highlight ed Highlig hted Challenge s & Opportun ities Conflic ted roles Mentio ned Conflic ted roles Conflic ted roles Conflic ted roles This table distributes the identified themes across 19 media panels / focus groups, reflecting the various perspectives and insights provided by each group.