Abstract Against the background of a fast-changing media environment and increasing competition in the science arena, we explored how media outlets use science- based press releases issued by research-intensive universities in South Africa. We compared 40 science-related media articles to related institutional press releases. We found that most press releases are re-published with minimal journalistic input and no crediting of the original source, with indications of hype present in a third of the media articles. This could be a reason for concern because press releases issued by research institutions are written to serve the interests of the institution and not to reflect on science. When media outlets re- publish these press releases without editorial input, it means that the critical or investigative role of the media is lost. Given concerns about the long-term implications of churnalism and hype in science media coverage, we ask whether PR-driven communication of science, as practiced by university media offices, among others, serves the long-term interests of science and society. We suggest that universities should consider the options and benefits of moving towards a new science communication paradigm focused less on reputation-building and more on constructive public engagement and helpful dialogue with society.

中文翻译：

---

科学传播中的传统主义和炒作：比较南非的大学新闻稿和新闻文章

摘要 在瞬息万变的媒体环境和科学领域竞争日益激烈的背景下，我们探索了媒体如何使用南非研究密集型大学发布的基于科学的新闻稿。我们将 40 篇与科学相关的媒体文章与相关机构新闻稿进行了比较。我们发现大多数新闻稿都是以最少的新闻投入重新发布的，并且没有注明原始来源，三分之一的媒体文章中存在炒作的迹象。这可能是一个令人担忧的原因，因为研究机构发布的新闻稿是为服务机构的利益而撰写的，而不是为了反映科学。当媒体在没有编辑意见的情况下重新发布这些新闻稿时，这意味着媒体的批评或调查作用已经丧失。鉴于对科学媒体报道中新闻主义和炒作的长期影响的担忧，我们询问公关驱动的科学传播，如大学媒体办公室等所实践的，是否符合科学和社会的长期利益。我们建议大学应该考虑转向新的科学传播范式的选择和好处，更少关注声誉建设，更多关注建设性的公众参与和与社会有益的对话。