It might have been Jimmy Kimmel, or any other sharp-tongued talk show hosts of late-night TV. In this instance, it was Samantha Bee, stating her opposition to childhood vaccinations humorously. “Who are you going to believe?” she asked. “Leading authorities on medical science, or 800 comments on your cousin’s Facebook page?”
Joking about science can have serious effects, according to studies by communication scholars. Accordingly, since 2013, Paul, a psychological professor, has conducted studies of how satire (讥讽) can influence people’s beliefs about science, which have shown that if you want to interest people in science and shape their views on hot-button science issues, satirical humor can work better.
Many Americans pay little attention to science. Even people who regularly watch TV news receive only scraps of science information in their media diet, because mainstream media outlets devote so little airtime to the subject. On top of that, some Americans may regard science as inaccessible.
Yet satirical humor can reach viewers who would never watch NOVA or read — well, National Geographic. Millions of people watch late-night television programs live, and videos of these shows get millions of views on streaming services. In 2016, a vote conducted by the University of Delaware Center indicated that nearly one in 10 said they learned about science from late-night television shows.
Late-night hosts may occasionally poke fun at scientists. More often, however, the hosts promote a positive image of science. By making science entertaining to audience with little knowledge of the topic, late-night television could spark science engagement. Furthermore, the researchers concluded that satirical shows had the biggest impact among the least educated viewers, thus helping to narrow a gap in attention to science. Though late-night satirical humor can boost science interest and awareness, it has its limits. Science is complex, and conveying that complexity in a few minutes while telling jokes can be a challenge.
【小题1】What does Paul’s studies of joking about science indicate?| A．It may do serious damage to science. |
| B．It can effectively popularize science. |
| C．It totally changes people’s attitude to science. |
| D．It will shift people’s attention from entertainment to science. |
| A．Because they enjoy watching entertainments. |
| B．Because science is not easy to come up with. |
| C．Because they find no interest in science issues. |
| D．Because science is scarcely seen on mainstream media. |
| A．The hosts get used to playing tricks on scientists. |
| B．The hosts’ aim is to build a positive image of science. |
| C．Education gap can be bridged through late-night shows. |
| D．Science participation can be promoted among their viewers. |
| A．Critical. | B．Objective. | C．Positive. | D．Negative. |
