In this episode of the How to Protect the Ocean podcast, host Andrew Lewin discusses the importance of accurate science communication. He emphasizes the need for researchers to ensure their facts are correct and to access scientific literature for accurate information. Andrew admits to occasionally falling for rumors or unproven theories but emphasizes the importance of correcting any inaccuracies. The episode focuses on speaking up for the ocean and taking action to protect it.

Tune in to learn more about the significance of accurate science communication in advocating for the ocean.

Share your conservation journey on the podcast by booking here: https://calendly.com/sufb/sufb-interview   Fill out our listener survey: https://www.speakupforblue.com/survey   Join the audio program - Build Your Marine Science and Conservation Career: https://www.speakupforblue.com/career   Facebook Group: https://bit.ly/3NmYvsI

Connect with Speak Up For Blue: Website: https://bit.ly/3fOF3Wf Instagram: https://bit.ly/3rIaJSG Twitter: https://bit.ly/3rHZxpc 

In this episode, Andrew emphasizes the crucial role of science communicators in providing valuable information to their audience. He stresses the importance of having a solid background knowledge and expertise in the subject matter when engaging in science communication through various platforms such as digital media, educational pieces, or classroom volunteering.

Andrew highlights the challenge of not always having immediate access to digital information when communicating with a live audience or in a classroom setting. In such situations, science communicators must rely on their own knowledge and expertise to ensure the accuracy of the information they provide. If they encounter a question they cannot answer, it is acceptable to respond with "I'll get back to you" and follow up later.

Andrew emphasizes the need for science communicators to conduct thorough research and ensure the accuracy of the information they share. They emphasize the importance of relying on verified facts and avoiding rumors or unproven theories. Science communicators should strive to provide the most up-to-date and reliable information available.

Overall, this episode underscores the responsibility of science communicators to bring value to their audience by providing accurate and reliable information. It emphasizes the importance of having strong background knowledge, conducting thorough research, and maintaining integrity in science communication.

When communicating with a live audience, science communicators must be well-prepared and knowledgeable, especially when quick access to information is not available. This is particularly important in situations where digital platforms are not accessible for immediate information retrieval. In such cases, science communicators must confidently address the topic at hand and possess a solid background knowledge. They should be able to respond to audience questions with accurate information. If uncertain about an answer, it is acceptable to say, "I'll get back to you" and follow up later. However, it is ideal to conduct thorough research beforehand and be well-versed in the specific topic being discussed, as well as related topics. By being well-prepared, science communicators can ensure the provision of accurate information to their audience and maintain the integrity of their communication.

In this episode, Andrew emphasizes the importance of honesty and transparency when communicating information, particularly in the field of science. They highlight the acceptability of responding with "I don't know" if one does not have the answer to a question. Instead of fabricating an answer or speculating, it is better to promise to provide the audience with the correct information later. This approach demonstrates integrity and ensures the sharing of accurate information. The host also emphasizes the significance of conducting thorough research and possessing a strong background knowledge of the topic being discussed, especially when speaking in front of a live audience or classroom where quick access to information may not be feasible. By admitting when one does not know something and committing to finding the answer, credibility can be maintained, and accurate information can be provided to the audience.