Science Communication as an Anomaly

Honest, I´m not trying to shoot myself in the foot. It´s just a combination of my liking of being a little provocative and my physicist's tendency to find symmetry.

So the point of this post is to put in writing what I had the chance to discuss in public last June 26 at a Science Café in the Café Retro in Copenhagen. In fact, perhaps it should be called a "Science Communication Café", as we were invited to discuss the state of the art in Science Communication. 

In my 5 minute contribution I suggested that Science Communication may have as its aim to disappear, just as feminist or other pro-equality groups ultimately work towards a society where they are not needed. 

The reality is that there are no "Architecture-Cafés", "Economy Festivals", "Law Fairs" or "History Famelabs" around. Professionals of these fields do not feel the need to establish the communication of their areas of work as a professional discipline on its own. And it´s not that they do not have their own share of controversial issues that affect society.

One of the usual aims of communicating science to the public is to promote science careers, as in most countries there is a lack of new blood to replace retiring scientists. Once this is achieved, this argument for science communication will no longer exist.

Another aim of science communication is to make science part of culture on the same footing as other areas of knowledge. Again, if/once this is achieved, this aim will dissipate.

Then there are the other aims for science communication - the need for science to be accountable to society, the need for citizens to be well informed when making choices in their lives or when voting... so there seems still be scope for science communication... BUT:

In parallel to all this it is also generally acknowledged that it is scientists themselves who should go out there and communicate their science. Perhaps not each single one of them, but audiences certainly prefer to have access to active scientists to learn about science.

So if this goal is achieved as well, what room is left for science communicators? What can they do that can not be done by a combination of scientists and PR & marketing teams of their research centres? 

I look forward to your opinions...!