SciLine aims to bridge such professional and cultural differences, facilitating seamless connections between experts and journalists at a time when reliable scientific sources in the media are more important than ever.

The more people tune in to coverage of mass violence events, the the more likely they are to develop stress symptoms that in turn increase their media consumption for the next event.

It is no secret that science has come under increasingly derisive attacks in recent years. There are those who view science as being inconsistent, untrustworthy, and even unethical. The findings by some researchers revealing that many published experiments cannot be easily repeated¾prompting the so-called reproducibility crisis¾have further fueled this narrative and led to serious concerns about wasteful spending on bioscience research. Recent media reports about the gene-editing experiments performed on human embryos by rogue Chinese scientist He Jiankui have given rise to fears that science operates with lax ethics. On the flip side, scientists face overwhelming pressure to publish and win grants, creating an atmosphere in which ethical and scientific standards are being squeezed to the breaking point. Although science provides enormous value to society, this message is often drowned out by the negative press, a situation made more critical when solid science is depicted as fake and fake science as real.