Political leaders increasingly rely on expert opinions in science and technology. A notable event occurred on November 19, 2024, when Elon Musk conducted a tour of the control center for then-President Donald Trump.
The fourth year of the Decade of Science and Technology, declared by Russian President Vladimir Putin, emphasizes the instrumental role of science in politics. The scientific community, however, perceives itself as a subject of political influence.
On the eve of 2025, the United States published a comprehensive 400-page report titled "Understanding and Addressing Misinformation About Science. 2024," prepared by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Academic Alexey Kholov clarified the terminology in his Telegram channel, stating that "misinformation" refers to incorrect information, in contrast to "disinformation," which is intentionally misleading.
The report focuses on misinformation, noting, "If misinformation about science leads to beliefs that contradict accepted scientific data, the consequences can be profound. False beliefs can result in behaviors and policy support that are not backed by accepted science, leading to negative outcomes for individuals and society." This raises concerns about misinformation's impact on political and legislative actions.
Researchers T.E. Taylor and K. Vishwanath outlined key research questions regarding the dynamics of misinformation in the information ecosystem, particularly its spread and effects on vulnerable communities.
The report concludes that public science communicators must understand how scientific evidence can be misinterpreted and should include important caveats in their communications.
Historian Mikhail Bukharin emphasized that the relationship between the state and science should incorporate care for the mental health of the nation, which is influenced by media and cultural institutions. The prevalence of charlatans in media can obscure public understanding.
American sociological research, particularly from the Pew Research Center, shows that 76% of Americans believe scientists act in the public interest, reflecting a shift in trust since the COVID-19 pandemic. Nevertheless, 51% feel scientists should engage in public debates, while 48% prefer they focus solely on facts.
Public perception of scientists is generally positive, with 89% viewing them as intelligent and 65% believing they are honest and collaborative. A November 2024 study published in Nature indicated that humility among scientists increases public trust.
Political manipulation of science can involve adapting research findings to support political agendas or influencing public opinion to create specific sentiments. Control over scientific resources and the use of scientists as consultants further illustrate this dynamic.
Recent examples include the Chernobyl disaster, where scientific assurances delayed critical decisions, and ongoing debates about climate change, where political actors navigate scientific findings to suit their narratives.
In November 2024, CERN ceased formal collaboration with approximately 500 specialists linked to Russia, balancing scientific collaboration with political correctness.
The discourse surrounding the origins of COVID-19 exemplifies the politicization of science, with conflicting interpretations of evidence from scientific journals and congressional reports.
In conclusion, the interplay between science and politics remains complex, with significant implications for public trust and the integrity of scientific discourse.