From 24 -26 June 2025, young journalists from across Europe came together at the European Parliament in Brussels for the European Science-Media Hub (ESMH) Summer School “Science Communication in the Digital Age”. Over the course of three days, participants engaged in expert panels, seminars, and hands-on workshops exploring the challenges and opportunities of communicating science in an era of social media and AI.
24 June: Opening session
In his introductory remarks, Christian Ehler (STOA Chair and MEP) stressed the importance of science journalism in shaping public understanding and informing policymakers. Society has never been so dependent on science, Ehler pointed out, yet science has never been so disconnected from the public, giving rise to “an explosion of mistrust.”
The challenges and opportunities for science journalism in the digital age were the focus of the opening session, moderated by Agnès Vernet (President of the European Federation for Science Journalism (EFSJ). A key challenge according to Dr. Ike Picone (Professor of Media and Journalism Studies at VUB) is a common “utopian image of the audience.” In reality, people are not rational, seeking high-quality journalism, but driven primarily by emotions.
To build trust, science communicators need to connect to their audiences on an emotional level. Here, online influencers are often ahead of the game, said Pavla Hubalkova (Science Writer at Wired Czech). Alok Jha (Science and Technology Editor at The Economist) noted the importance of keeping readers engaged and building communities, both online and in-person.
25 June: Seminar on trust in the digital age
The second day started with a seminar on fighting disinformation and strengthening trust in science, focusing on the role of EU regulation, moderated by Gaël Van Weyenbergh (Digital Innovation Strategist, MEOH). The work of the European Parliament in combating disinformation was presented by Christopher Coakley (Press officer at the European Parliament, Disinformation Team) and Doichin Cholakov (Member of the Secretariat of the EP Special Committee on the European Democracy Shield, EUDS).
The discussion turned to regulation against disinformation, including the Digital Service Act and the Media Freedom Act. The DSA is being implemented in a very sensitive political climate, Dr. Trisha Meyer (Professor in Digital Governance and Participation, VUB) explained. The Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) regulated by the DSA are predominantly American companies, many of which are reluctant to implement EU regulation. “We are not leading the way as Europeans,” Dr. Sara Degli-Esposti (Research Scientist in Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, IFS-CSIC) said, stressing the need to bring audiences to European platforms instead.
25 June: Fact-checking workshop
The expert panel was followed by an interactive workshop where participants were given strategies to identify disinformation. First out, Rocío Benavente (Editorial Project Coordinator at Maldita Ciencia in Spain), surveyed a wide range of techniques of misinformation: including using humour out of context, manipulating images, and confusing correlation with causation. Patryk Grażewicz (Fact-checker at Pravda in Poland) then provided a taxonomy of disinformation and misinformation and stressed the need to recognise cognitive biases that make people vulnerable to false information.
Both Rocío Benavente and Patryk Grażewicz emphasised the need for selectivity when deciding what to fact-check, not least given the constant flood of mis- and disinformation. They also underlined the need to cooperate with a broad range of actors, teaching people to verify information themselves. As Benavente put it, “We have to make alliances with educators, social scientists who know about persuasion, who know about public policies and how to implement measures to reach the right audience.”
25 June: Masterclass on telling science stories
In the afternoon, participants joined a masterclass on science storytelling led by Pierre Girard (Science journalist and videographer at ARTE & YouTuber) and Stina Börchers (Neuroscientist & science communicator). There is no one-size-fits-all for science information in the digital age, Pierre Girard said. Different formats work for different topics and different audiences: shorter content is not always more suitable. He also underlined the need for science journalists to question the purpose of technology and stand by their editorial independence.
Meanwhile, Stina Börchers gave practical tips on how to boost engagement on algorithmically mediated platforms such as Instagram. Users are more likely to remember content that is emotional, relatable, surprising and presented in a story-like format, she pointed out. Nonetheless, Börchers stressed that “In scientific storytelling, going viral should not be the goal”. The aim should be to offer credible, valuable information.
25 June: Workshop on data for science stories
The day ended with a workshop focused on using data to communicate science. First, Giulio Sabbati (EPRS – Strategy, Coordination & Outreach unit) offered practical ‘Do’s and don’ts’ for data visualisation: “The most important thing in an infographic is that you tell a story”. Charlie Giattino (Our World in Data, Communications & Outreach Manager) then taught participants about tools and resources available at Our World in Data and offered lessons for data presentation. When using data, Giattino emphasised, science journalists should always explain the data, context, and the key takeaways. Both speakers stressed the importance of simplicity when presenting data.
26 June: Masterclass on AI and science journalism
The final day began with a masterclass by Mirko Bischofberger (Science Communicator & Founder of Science Studios) focused on how to leverage AI for science communication, whilst recognising ethical issues. AI systems will always make mistakes, meaning they need to be used with care. “Never use AI in a field you can’t assess yourself”, Bischofberger suggested. He then explained how to best use AI tools, including which model to choose and how to formulate prompts, for instance by specifying desired outputs – so-called Reverse Prompt Engineering.
26 June: Seminar on science communication networks and collaboration
Participants then attended a seminar focused on collaborative projects and networks in science communication, moderated by Anthony Lockett (Head of Unit for Communication at the European Commission’s DG for Research and Innovation).
Dr. Jason Pridmore (Professor of Human Centric AI and Society) presented the COALESCE project, aiming to create a European Competence Center for Science Communication that can make tools and resources widely accessible. In the seminar, the speakers highlighted the importance of strengthening ties between journalists and scientists.
Alessandra Fornetti (Coordinator of the Science Communication unit at the Venice International University) pointed out that having built a network of scientists before a crisis is crucial for science journalists. Meanwhile, Fabio Turone (Director of the Center for Ethics in Science and Journalism) detailed the current ERC Science Journalism Initiative FRONTIERS, which aims to increase the trust between researchers and journalists. Turone also emphasised the important role of journalists in scrutinising science: “Science journalism should be seen as democratic infrastructure”.
26 June: Closing Session
The Summer School ended with an expert panel discussing the role of science communication in a healthy democracy and the threats it faces, moderated by Morien Raeymakers (Journalist at De Morgen).
Cameron Brick (Assistant Professor of Social Psychology, University of Amsterdam) and Lina Galvez (MEP, STOA Vice-Chair) both identified the threat of powerful actors polluting the information space, seeking to harm democracy. Fascism and autocracy need ignorance, Galvez pointed out. Mario Scharfbillig (Science for Policy Analyst, European Commission’s Joint Research Centre) raised the point that people are being fed the information that resonates with their prior beliefs through a handful of apps where the algorithms are designed for engagement. Nonetheless, he criticised doomsday scenarios, pointing to research showing that people’s diet of disinformation is still relatively low.
According to Elisabetta Tola (science and data journalist), one of the biggest challenges is “bringing scientific communication out of the bubble”. The speakers also emphasised the need for radical transparency on both media and science funding to improve trust.
