Blind faith: fact, fiction and fraud in public controversy over science

Abstract

Constructivist approaches have flourished in both science studies and media studies during the 1980s. Although similar perspectives are used in these fields to study the production of non-fictional texts, there is little exchange and integration on a theoretical level. This article uses the Buck-Goudsmit Affair to explore an integrated constructivisit approach to public controversy over science. The Buck-Goudsmit Affair is a public controversy in the Netherlands that started in 1990 over a claim about a possible cure against AIDS. It is argued that the public understanding of the controversy can be analysed in terms of a `meta-narrative' structure which accounts for facts, processes and identities of those involved. This `meta-narrative' structure of the developing controversy can be reconstrued on the basis of the texts that make up the textual corpus of the controversy. Various sorts of non-fictional text play a role in public controversy, for example, scientific texts, journalistic texts and legal and administrative documents. Texts belonging to these various genres differ in the ways in which the `factuality' and the `trustworthiness' of the text is established. The `meta-narrative' or public understanding of the controversy results from the ways in which texts refer to other texts in establishing facts, identities of actors and accounts. The interactions between texts belonging to different genres reflect the dynamics of journalism, science and the law. Blind faith and trust in texts from other actors and other domains appear to be more important in bringing about changes in the way in which the controversy is understood than solid proof or independent hard facts.