I would like to know if anyone else is concerned whether scientists participating in a march, which is inherently political, may further erode public confidence in science as objective and nonpartisan.
It seems to me that given the current climate, any march in protest of specific policies runs the risk of being seen—or misrepresented—as an attack on the majority party, which would only further reinforce certain stereotypes of scientists, and make it all the easier for politicians to dismiss them as just another special-interest group that can be safely ignored. The fact is that a march presents no rational arguments, invites no constructive dialogue and changes no minds. The format of a march lends itself to confrontation and exclusion—the very opposite of the successful engagement which science so desperately needs. Worse, it surrenders any message to interpretation by the media, and may ultimately serve to trivialize the very issues the marchers had thought to support. I have to wonder at the effect on science policy, if every person who had planned to march instead scheduled meetings with their senator, representative and local state delegate. A face-to-face meeting in a quiet office or conference room, without the noise and shouting of a protest march, has a far better chance to be effective. Politicians can always shrug off a thirty-second clip on the news, especially if it shows chanting, drumming and handwritten cardboard signs. But when local constituents schedule an appointment and present their concerns like professionals, the information has a better chance of being considered and remembered. Not all politicians will make themselves available, to their discredit; but for those that do, a face-to-face meeting opens the prospect of real dialogue and follow-up contacts, with the potential for long-term exchange. I would suggest that this sort of patient, personal and nonconfrontational approach may be far more valuable to the scientific community than participating in a brief event which is structurally incapable of presenting complex concerns with the nuance they deserve. Respectfully, J. A.