Tackling the "Rhetorical Disadvantage of Science":Putting Ourselves Back in the Story

As scholars of political communication, most of us are steeped in a research practice that emphasizes scholarly objectivity, empirical rigor, and the scientific method. But, at the heart of what we do is a commitment to normative ideals. Most of us wouldn't be in this profession if we were not guided by a respect for democratic processes and institutions, and wanted to figure out ways to keep these processes and institutions functioning in a healthy way. Achieving these goals requires engagement outside of our own insular intellectual community. Increasingly, we are realizing this truth: Figuring out what shapes democratic health has little value if we only tell one another. The trouble is, there are legitimate obstacles that limit our field's impact on journalists, policymakers, and the public - some institutional, some cultural, some psychological, and some that simply stem from a scholar's lack of hours in a given day. But at the individual level, many scholars are stymied by the disconnect between two seemingly incompatible guiding principles: the epistemology of scientific inquiry on the one hand, and the need to translate research to journalists and the public in a way that resonates on the other.