Jennifer Doudna (UC Berkeley Professor) – From Ribosomes to Revolution (Aug 2021)
Chapters
00:00:00 Scientists' Growing Relationship With the Public
Jennifer Doudna’s Journey to Communicating Basic Science: Jennifer Doudna’s introduction to media interest was through her advisor’s work on the origin of life. She recognized the importance of explaining research to non-specialists, even though it could be challenging. CRISPR’s potential and responsibility brought the need for effective communication to the forefront for Doudna.
The Importance of a Larger Context: Joe Palka highlights the difficulty scientists face in explaining the significance of their work within a broader context. Doudna emphasizes the need to start with “why” – the purpose and point of the research – before delving into details. The pandemic provided opportunities to explain the role of fundamental research in vaccine development and virus understanding.
The Evolving Media Landscape for Science Communication: Doudna observes the increasing role of podcasts and values their digestible and conversational format. She appreciates NPR’s interview-style shows for their real-time discussions on science. Doudna finds platforms like TikTok and Instagram less effective due to their limited information capacity.
Jennifer Doudna’s Podcast Listening Habits: Doudna enjoys listening to podcasts for news and information, as well as for science-specific topics. She follows podcasts in her own field and beyond, showing her interest in diverse scientific disciplines.
00:10:38 Engaging Scientists in Public Communication
Public Communication in Science: Jennifer Doudna expresses a varied and open approach to podcasts, listening to them during walks based on recommendations or personal interests. She recognizes the wide range of topics covered in podcasts and appreciates the format’s ability to address diverse issues.
Challenges in Media Engagement: Some senior scientists show disinterest in media engagement and discourage their students from participating, emphasizing the importance of laboratory work instead. Doudna admits to feeling intimidated by media interactions due to concerns about misinterpretations or garbled messages.
Balancing Research and Public Engagement: Doudna acknowledges the fear of interacting with non-experts and worries about incorrect information being spread. She highlights the need to address these concerns and find a balance between research and public outreach.
Navigating Media Gatekeepers: Doudna acknowledges the challenges of reaching a large audience through traditional media channels and the need to go through gatekeepers or use self-publishing methods. She emphasizes the importance of genuine interest and engagement in science communication, recognizing that not everyone is comfortable or skilled in this area.
Advice to Younger Self: Doudna would advise her younger self to embrace media engagement and public communication, recognizing its value in disseminating scientific information. She emphasizes the importance of finding a balance between research and outreach, aligning with personal interests and abilities.
Stereotypes and Communication in Science: Jennifer Doudna emphasizes the need for scientists to be able to effectively communicate their work to non-experts. She acknowledges the challenges of explaining complex scientific concepts in accessible ways, especially when discussing new technologies with both exciting opportunities and potential risks. Doudna compares this challenge to the “Carl Sagan syndrome,” where scientists who excel at communication are often perceived as less capable in their scientific field.
The Perception of Scientists: Doudna discusses the perception that scientists who engage in public communication or have interests outside of their research are not as serious about their work. She notes that this sentiment has changed somewhat over time but still persists in some circles. The idea that true scientists must be completely dedicated to their research to the exclusion of all else is a stereotype that can be limiting and discouraging.
Finding Passion and Starting Conversations: Doudna suggests that the key to getting people interested in scientific topics they may not be familiar with is to start with passion and enthusiasm. When scientists are genuinely excited about their work, they can communicate that excitement to others and make the topic more engaging. She encourages scientists to find creative ways to share their knowledge and spark conversations about science with non-experts.
Understanding the Importance of Enthusiasm: The speaker emphasizes the significance of enthusiasm in engaging an audience. Passionate communication attracts attention and draws people into the topic. Students have expressed how their professors’ enthusiasm influenced their interest in obscure topics.
Avoiding a Lecturing Approach: Lecturing can create a barrier between the speaker and the audience. Effective communication involves a more conversational and humanized approach. Experts should aim to invite and engage the audience, fostering a sense of mutual respect.
Addressing Scientists’ Concerns About Self-Disclosure: Some scientists may feel uncomfortable revealing their personalities to the public. The speaker acknowledges this challenge and emphasizes the value of personal connection. Scientists who struggle with self-disclosure may need to find ways to become comfortable with it or consider alternative communication strategies.
Delegation as a Possible Solution: Recognizing that science communication may not suit everyone’s preferences is important. In cases where scientists are reluctant to engage directly with the public, delegation can be an effective approach. Extroverted team members or “compensating introverts” may be willing to take on the role of spokesperson.
00:20:28 Communicating Science for Public Engagement
Public Understanding and Decision-Making: The public’s understanding of scientific information alone may not be sufficient for them to make informed decisions. Factors such as biases and personal values influence decision-making, even when presented with facts and data.
Scientists as Advocates: Scientists face a dilemma between maintaining objectivity and advocating for important scientific issues with potential life-or-death implications, such as vaccination. The desire for scientists to remain apolitical and objective can conflict with the need to communicate vital information to the public.
Navigating Ethical Implications: The example of germline modification illustrates the challenges of grappling with ethical dilemmas when scientific possibilities emerge. Ongoing discussions and careful management are necessary to address ethical concerns and ensure responsible use of scientific advancements.
Learning from Missteps: Scientists may encounter missteps in communicating with the public, such as answering questions that are not directly asked to convey important information. Reflecting on past interviews and interactions helps scientists improve their communication skills and effectively convey their messages.
Engaging the Public in Research Ethics: Listening to various publics and specific communities can influence the research questions scientists ask and the way they conduct their work. Engaging with individuals and families affected by genetic diseases can provide insights into potential ethical considerations and the potential benefits of gene editing technologies. Collaborating with researchers studying early human development can uncover fundamental questions that can be addressed through scientific research, potentially leading to advancements in fundamental science and medicine.
00:31:07 Navigating the Challenges of Genome Editing Communication and Engagement
Changing Perspective on CRISPR: Jennifer Doudna’s viewpoint on CRISPR evolved as she considered future scenarios where editing the human germline might be appropriate. Keeping an open mind and embracing new information is crucial for scientists to adapt their views.
Recognizing the Importance of Science Communication: Doudna realized the need to communicate about CRISPR after conversations with her neighbor, a computer scientist, who grasped the potential of DNA editing as data manipulation. The prospect of human embryo editing prompted Doudna to engage in public discussions due to the lack of transparency and regulation at the time.
Seeking Support for Science Communication: Doudna sought support from colleagues at the Innovative Genomics Institute to tackle challenges related to genome editing. Initially reluctant to take on this role, Doudna overcame her hesitation, recognizing the critical need for scientists to lead discussions about the ethical and societal implications of gene editing.
Collaboration with Experts: Doudna collaborated with scientists, ethicists, political experts, and legal experts at the University of California, Berkeley to inform and guide discussions about CRISPR and its applications.
00:36:13 Communicating Science: From Elevator Pitch to Passionate Advocacy
Important skills for scientists: Jennifer Doudna emphasizes the importance of scientists developing strong communication and advocacy skills. She advises scientists to have an “elevator pitch” ready to explain their research and its significance to people from different backgrounds.
Training opportunities: Doudna mentions attending a session led by actor Alan Alda, who runs a science communication organization. Alda’s team trained postdoctoral researchers to communicate their projects effectively, even to people from different scientific disciplines.
Avoiding jargon: Doudna stresses the need for scientists to avoid using acronyms and specialized language when communicating with people outside their field. She encourages scientists to maintain a distance from the jargon they use among colleagues and to remember what it was like to not understand those terms.
Balancing advocacy and objectivity: Doudna acknowledges the debate among scientists about whether they should become passionate advocates for their work or remain objective observers. She understands the different perspectives on this issue and recognizes that some scientists believe scientists should not advocate for specific causes.
Scientists’ Responsibility to Take a Stand: Jennifer Doudna believes that scientists have a responsibility to take a stand on issues with real consequences for people’s health, the environment, and the future of humanity. Doudna emphasizes the importance of expressing personal views and acknowledging their subjectivity.
Engaging with Journalists: Joe Palca stresses that interviews should not be one-way conversations. Scientists should engage with journalists to ensure understanding and accuracy. Asking journalists to clarify or repeat information is acceptable and beneficial.
Advice for Public Information Officers (PIOs): PIOs should not shy away from expressing their expertise and opinions on scientific issues. PIOs should be proactive in communicating with the media and the public. PIOs should be prepared to handle difficult questions and criticisms constructively.
00:40:56 Tips for Collaborating Between Scientists and Communications Professionals
Communication Professionals’ Role: Communication professionals are essential in helping scientists share their research and ideas with a broader audience. They can help scientists escape their silos and communicate complex concepts to non-experts.
Understanding the Big Picture: Scientists need to be able to explain the significance of their work in a way that is accessible to the general public. This involves providing context and explaining the broader implications of the research.
Avoiding Technical Jargon: Scientists should avoid using technical jargon and overly complex explanations when communicating their work. Instead, they should aim to use clear and concise language that non-experts can understand.
Ready Explanation: Scientists should have a ready explanation of their work that they can share with anyone, from a Nobel Prize interviewer to their grandmother.
Awe and Curiosity: Awe and curiosity are powerful emotions that can motivate people to learn more about science. Scientists can leverage these emotions by sharing the awe-inspiring aspects of their work and by encouraging curiosity in others.
Different Meanings of Awe: Different people have different definitions of awe, and what is awe-inspiring to one person may not be to another. Scientists should be mindful of this when communicating their work and should tailor their explanations to their audience.
00:43:14 Awe, Curiosity, and Engaging the Public in Basic Science
Awe in Basic Science: Jennifer Doudna expresses awe at the discovery that bacteria use RNA molecules to fight viruses, which is a fascinating example of evolution in action. This showcases the beauty and complexity of biological systems.
Opportunities with CRISPR Technology: CRISPR technology holds immense potential to cure genetic diseases and address various health challenges. The progress made in treating sickle cell disease using CRISPR showcases its practical applications and impact on human lives.
Challenges in Making CRISPR Accessible: Doudna emphasizes the need to ensure that CRISPR technology is accessible to everyone who can benefit from it, regardless of their location or socioeconomic status.
Engaging the Public in Basic Science: Doudna recognizes the struggle faced by basic scientists who pursue research for the sake of knowledge rather than immediate applications. She highlights the value of fundamental research in advancing our understanding of core biological principles and the unexpected practical applications that may arise from it.
Justifying Basic Research without Tangible Applications: Joe Palca emphasizes the importance of explaining basic research to the public in a way that sparks curiosity and encourages exploration of the unknown.
Understanding Public Knowledge and Misconceptions: Doudna stresses the need to understand what the public knows and doesn’t know about science to effectively engage them in scientific discussions.
Abstract
Exploring the Art of Science Communication: Jennifer Doudna’s Journey from Laboratory to Public Sphere
Nobel laureate Jennifer Doudna’s insights into communicating complex scientific concepts, particularly regarding CRISPR technology, underscore the evolving role of scientists in public discourse. Initially media-shy, Doudna has transitioned into a proponent of accessible science communication, emphasizing the need for clear, relatable explanations and the significance of passionate advocacy in science. Her journey reflects a broader shift in the scientific community, balancing the depth of research with the breadth of public engagement. This article delves into Doudna’s transformation, her strategies for effective communication, and the wider implications for scientists navigating the intricate landscape of public discourse and ethical responsibilities.
1. Jennifer Doudna’s Transformation in Public Communication:
Jennifer Doudna, renowned for her groundbreaking work in CRISPR technology, initially harbored apprehensions about public engagement due to fears of misrepresentation. Over time, she embraced the importance of communicating science, overcoming the academia’s traditional prioritization of lab work over public outreach. Doudna’s experiences highlight the importance of connecting with non-experts, the challenges of delivering complex messages, and the evolution from being media-shy to an adept public communicator.
Jennifer Doudna’s Journey to Communicating Basic Science:
Jennifer Doudna’s introduction to media interest was through her advisor’s work on the origin of life. She recognized the importance of explaining research to non-specialists, even though it could be challenging. CRISPR’s potential and responsibility brought the need for effective communication to the forefront for Doudna.
Understanding the Importance of Enthusiasm:
In engaging an audience, the speaker emphasizes the significance of enthusiasm. Passionate communication attracts attention and draws people into the topic. Students have expressed how their professors’ enthusiasm influenced their interest in obscure topics.
Developing Strong Communication Skills:
Doudna emphasizes the importance of scientists developing strong communication and advocacy skills. She advises scientists to have an “elevator pitch” ready to explain their research and its significance to people from different backgrounds. Training opportunities, such as sessions led by actor Alan Alda’s science communication organization, are available to help scientists improve their communication abilities.
2. The Role of Passion and Authenticity in Science Communication:
Doudna’s approach emphasizes the power of enthusiasm and authenticity in engaging the public. By shedding the professional guard and inviting open dialogue, scientists can foster interest and understanding. Doudna’s own journey, marked by her awe at the wonders of biological mechanisms like RNA self-programming, illustrates how genuine passion can be a driving force in captivating audiences and disseminating scientific knowledge.
The Importance of a Larger Context:
Joe Palka highlights the difficulty scientists face in explaining the significance of their work within a broader context. Doudna emphasizes the need to start with “why” – the purpose and point of the research – before delving into details. The pandemic provided opportunities to explain the role of fundamental research in vaccine development and virus understanding.
Avoiding a Lecturing Approach:
Effective communication involves a more conversational and humanized approach. Experts should aim to invite and engage the audience, fostering a sense of mutual respect. Lecturing can create a barrier between the speaker and the audience.
3. Overcoming the Challenges of Public Engagement in Science:
Conveying scientific information to the public presents unique challenges, especially on topics like vaccines and germline modification. Doudna highlights the necessity for scientists to go beyond just presenting facts and data, considering the diverse biases and motivations that influence public perception. She advocates for active engagement in advocating scientific advancements, recognizing the delicate balance between maintaining objectivity and championing scientific progress.
Challenges in Media Engagement:
Some senior scientists show disinterest in media engagement and discourage their students from participating, emphasizing the importance of laboratory work instead. Doudna admits to feeling intimidated by media interactions due to concerns about misinterpretations or garbled messages.
Addressing Scientists’ Concerns About Self-Disclosure:
Some scientists may feel uncomfortable revealing their personalities to the public. The speaker acknowledges this challenge and emphasizes the value of personal connection. Scientists who struggle with self-disclosure may need to find ways to become comfortable with it or consider alternative communication strategies.
Engaging with Journalists:
Joe Palka stresses that interviews should not be one-way conversations. Scientists should engage with journalists to ensure understanding and accuracy. Asking journalists to clarify or repeat information is acceptable and beneficial.
4. Navigating Ethical Dilemmas in Science Communication:
Doudna shares insights into her personal struggles with ethical dilemmas, especially regarding germline modification. Her journey from opposition to considering ethical justifications exemplifies the importance of engaging with affected communities. This engagement not only informs scientific research but also enriches the ethical discourse surrounding sensitive scientific topics.
Stereotypes and Communication in Science:
Jennifer Doudna emphasizes the need for scientists to be able to effectively communicate their work to non-experts. She acknowledges the challenges of explaining complex scientific concepts in accessible ways, especially when discussing new technologies with both exciting opportunities and potential risks. Doudna compares this challenge to the “Carl Sagan syndrome,” where scientists who excel at communication are often perceived as less capable in their scientific field.
Delegation as a Possible Solution:
Recognizing that science communication may not suit everyone’s preferences is important. In cases where scientists are reluctant to engage directly with the public, delegation can be an effective approach. Extroverted team members or “compensating introverts” may be willing to take on the role of spokesperson.
5. Effective Communication Strategies in Science:
Recognizing the potential miscommunication risks, Doudna stresses the importance of crafting messages with care and guiding discussions to convey critical information effectively. She recommends using analogies, metaphors, and visual aids to make complex ideas relatable. Her approach to science communication, involving collaboration with experts across various fields, offers a blueprint for other scientists to effectively engage diverse audiences.
The Evolving Media Landscape for Science Communication:
Doudna observes the increasing role of podcasts and values their digestible and conversational format. She appreciates NPR’s interview-style shows for their real-time discussions on science. Doudna finds platforms like TikTok and Instagram less effective due to their limited information capacity.
Public Understanding and Decision-Making:
The public’s understanding of scientific information alone may not be sufficient for them to make informed decisions. Factors such as biases and personal values influence decision-making, even when presented with facts and data.
6. The Significance of Curiosity-Driven Research:
Balancing between curiosity-driven research and its practical applications, Doudna underscores the value of fundamental research in contributing to transformative scientific advancements. She advocates for communicating the intrinsic value of basic science to the public, encouraging them to appreciate the significance of curiosity and exploration in scientific endeavors.
Public Communication in Science:
Jennifer Doudna expresses a varied and open approach to podcasts, listening to them during walks based on recommendations or personal interests. She recognizes the wide range of topics covered in podcasts and appreciates the format’s ability to address diverse issues.
Scientists as Advocates:
Scientists face a dilemma between maintaining objectivity and advocating for important scientific issues with potential life-or-death implications, such as vaccination. The desire for scientists to remain apolitical and objective can conflict with the need to communicate vital information to the public.
Awe in Basic Science:
Doudna expresses awe at the discovery that bacteria use RNA molecules to fight viruses, a fascinating example of evolution. This showcases the beauty and complexity of biological systems.
Opportunities with CRISPR Technology:
CRISPR technology holds immense potential to cure genetic diseases and address various health challenges. Its progress in treating sickle cell disease exemplifies its practical applications and impact.
Challenges in Making CRISPR Accessible:
Doudna emphasizes ensuring CRISPR technology is accessible to everyone, regardless of location or socioeconomic status.
Engaging the Public in Basic Science:
Doudna recognizes the struggle faced by basic scientists pursuing research for knowledge rather than immediate applications. She highlights the value of fundamental research in advancing core biological principles and the unexpected practical applications that may arise.
Justifying Basic Research without Tangible Applications:
Palka emphasizes the importance of explaining basic research to the public in a way that sparks curiosity and encourages exploration of the unknown.
Understanding Public Knowledge and Misconceptions:
Doudna stresses the need to understand what the public knows and doesn’t know about science to effectively engage them in scientific discussions.
The Continuous Evolution of Science Communication:
Jennifer Doudna’s experiences in communicating science reflect an ongoing journey, requiring continual adaptation and learning. By engaging respectfully with the public, addressing concerns, and fostering a scientifically literate society, scientists like Doudna play a crucial role in bridging the gap between complex scientific research and public understanding. Her journey from a reserved researcher to an influential public communicator exemplifies the evolving role of scientists in today’s rapidly changing media landscape.
Advice to Younger Self:
Doudna would advise her younger self to embrace media engagement and public communication, recognizing its value in disseminating scientific information. She emphasizes the importance of finding a balance between research and outreach, aligning with personal interests and abilities.
Navigating Ethical Implications:
The example of germline modification illustrates the challenges of grappling with ethical dilemmas when scientific possibilities emerge. Ongoing discussions and careful management are necessary to address ethical concerns and ensure responsible use of scientific advancements.
Key Takeaway:
Doudna’s narrative serves as a testament to the essential role of scientists in public communication, highlighting the need for clarity, passion, and ethical consideration in their interactions with the broader society. Her transformation offers valuable insights for the scientific community to navigate the complex terrain of public engagement, ethical responsibilities, and the relentless pursuit of knowledge.
Jennifer Doudna's groundbreaking work on CRISPR-Cas9 revolutionized gene editing, earning her a Nobel Prize. Doudna is also a role model for aspiring scientists and advocate for the ethical use of CRISPR technology....
CRISPR-Cas9 discovery revolutionized gene editing, leading to complex ethical discussions and the need for regulatory frameworks. Jennifer Doudna's journey highlights the evolving role of scientists in addressing societal implications of their work....
CRISPR-Cas9 technology revolutionized genome editing, enabling precise manipulation of DNA for disease treatment and fundamental research. The discovery sparked ethical discussions on human embryo editing and the need for responsible use guidelines....
Jennifer Doudna's work in developing the CRISPR technology revolutionized gene editing, potentially transforming medicine, agriculture, and more. Doudna's ethical leadership and commitment to mentoring are as important as her scientific achievements....
CRISPR, a revolutionary gene-editing technology, has profound ethical, scientific, and regulatory implications, particularly in the context of human genome editing. The ease of access and accessibility of CRISPR raise concerns about potential misuse and the need for balancing scientific progress with responsible use....
Jennifer Doudna's discovery of CRISPR-Cas9 revolutionized genetics and raised ethical questions about gene editing. Doudna transitioned to public advocacy, emphasizing responsible and ethical applications of gene editing technology....
Jennifer Doudna's scientific journey is marked by resilience, innovation, and impact, leading to transformative discoveries in genetics and gene editing, particularly with CRISPR-Cas9. Doudna's path was shaped by early influences, mentorships, and her fearless exploration of uncharted scientific territories, emphasizing the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration and embracing challenges....