Uganda: Cultural values and modern media as drivers of science communication

Talking About Gene Drive in Uganda: The Need for Science Communication to Underpin Engagement

“…There are significant structural barriers to reporting on gene drive in Uganda. Ugandan media houses are small and under-resourced, and there is no tradition of science reporting, which means that science news is often covered by freelancers without adequate training and support ( Lukanda, 2019 , 2020 ). Media outlets often do not have dedicated science desks, and science journalists struggle to access scientific news and sources of reliable information ( Appiah et al, 2015 ).…”

“…In addition, social and political tensions surrounding GM organisms make gene drive a sensitive topic that scientists and journalists alike may be reluctant to discuss in the media. The politicization of the GMOs debate, the grip of politicians on many science-related issues, and potential backlash from anti-GM activists may have “pushed scientists into silence” ( Lukanda, 2020 , p. 925), while journalists risk their safety if they write about politically contentious issues ( BBC Media Action, 2019 ). Furthermore, media outlets attempt to represent the views of various stakeholders, which can create “a false balance between the pro- and the anti-GMO activists” ( Lukanda, 2019 , p. 652).…”

“…There are many channels by which political and scientific information is disseminated in Uganda. Informal channels such as family and friends are important routes ( Conroy-Krutz, 2016 ), as well as more traditional ways of dissemination in communities, for example, drumming, performances, and cultural and religious events (for an in-depth account of the science communication landscape in Uganda, see Lukanda, 2020 ). In the experience of the teachers taking part in our study, none of these channels was disseminating information about gene drive, and the technology was not discussed by anyone they knew or interacted with.…”