This panel examined the evolving relationship between science and the media in India, exploring both opportunities and persistent barriers. While public appetite for science-related content, particularly in health, environment, and technology remains strong, structural and communication gaps continue to undermine reach and impact.Panelists described the relationship between scientists and media as at once “confused,” “distant,” “evolutionary,” and “rising.” A recurring theme was the need to move beyond one-way communication toward dialogic, trust-based relationships, nurtured in “peacetime” rather than only during crises.

Dr. Sarah Iqbal emphasized that the media remains the public’s primary source of scientific knowledge, but scientists must embrace new tools-humor, storytelling, and vernacular languages—to connect meaningfully. Radio host Khurafati Nitin described COVID-19 as a turning point where radio bridged fears through live, expert-led discussions, while underscoring the importance of simplicity and relatability.

TV journalist Naghma Saher highlighted the absence of dedicated science reporters and called for contextual storytelling that links research to people’s daily lives. Veteran journalist Pallava Bagla noted India’s strong appetite for science but urged scientists to share multimedia-rich, accessible content and to communicate in Indian languages. Print media perspectives, shared by Amitabh Sinha and Jacob Koshy, underscored depth and trust. While bandwidth remains a newsroom challenge, both agreed that proactive engagement from scientists, openness from institutions, and long-term relationship-building are essential.

Collectively, the panel emphasized that science communication is not optional—it is a core responsibility of the scientific ecosystem. With stronger institutional support, capacity-building, and new collaborative formats, India can bridge the distance between its vibrant research enterprise and the public it serves.

• The science–media relationship is evolving
 • Mixed descriptors: confused, distant, rising, evolutionary, increasing engagement.
 • Trust has improved, but major structural gaps remain.

• Barriers & challenges
 • No dedicated science reporters in TV/radio.
 • Scientists often share jargon-heavy, inaccessible outputs.
 • Institutional communication is rigid and outdated (Word files, no multimedia, no contact).

• Public interest exists
 • Indians are deeply interested in health, environment, technology, and disaster science.
 • Audience appetite is not the issue — presentation and access are.

• Timing & relevance matter
 • The public pays attention during crises (pandemics, earthquakes, climate disasters).
 • That’s the best moment to insert scientific explanations and context.

• Formats & content strategy
 • All formats (reels, print explainers, podcasts, long-form) work — but content must be good.
 • Need for vernacular science communication alongside English.