Social sciences are increasingly important, as was also shown during the last World Science Forum, November 2009. We, as (natural) science journalists, do report on (natural) science the way we think natural sciences are. But many of us, at least many of those present on this Research and Media Network, only have a projection of science, and convey this projection on to the public -- which again gets a projection out of our journalistic projections.
I think it is important to be aware of those sometimes intended, sometimes unwanted sub-messages we transport to our audience, while thinking we a reporting unpartially.
This problem is very outstanding in climate change reporting. Today, there is no need any more to report the facts. The facts are there, and no discussion is needed. However, I seldom read or see contributions how societies react or -- in most cases -- do not react, because climate is an abstract issue, which people can only approach with projections.