Scientist Citizens: Rhetoric and Responsibility in L’Aquila

Pamela Pietrucci University of the Humanities ; Leah Ceccarelli

Abstract

AbstractIn this essay, we analyze the public communication debacle before the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake that led to the infamous trial of the “L’Aquila Seven.” Examining the trial transcripts to extract norms regarding the proper role of scientists in society, we conclude that the first verdict interpellated the figure of the responsible scientist citizen who is expected to perform rhetorical citizenship when communicating with a lay public, while the second assumed a distinction between public and technical spheres that absolves scientists from responsibility to their fellow citizens and reduces their role to performance of an expertise divorced from rhetoric. Tracing the civic outcomes of these conflicting norms, we identify three missed opportunities during the prequake discourse in which the scientists failed to correct statements that they, and only they, knew to be flawed. To prevent future communicative debacles that arise from a dangerous separation of scientists and laypeople, we argue that scientists need to come to see themselves as scientist citizens, experts who take on the civic responsibility of clearly communicating their knowledge to their fellow citizens when such sharing is necessary to the public good.

Journal
Rhetoric & Public Affairs
Published
2019-03-01
DOI
10.14321/rhetpublaffa.22.1.0095
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
OA PDF Bronze
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (4)

  1. Rhetoric Society Quarterly
  2. Technical Communication Quarterly
  3. Communication Design Quarterly
  4. Philosophy & Rhetoric

References (72) · 5 in this index

  1. 1. Italy v. Major Risks Commission, N. 380/12 R. Sent. (2012), 94. All translations from Italian to English h…
  2. 2. Italy v. Major Risks Commission, N. 380/12 R. Sent. (2012), 1–4. As we will outline later in this paper, t…
  3. 3. The stories of the families of the earthquake victims can be found in the trial transcript, which includes…
  4. 4. “Italy v. Major Risks Commission, N. 3317 R. Sent. (2014).” The decision of the appeals court (Corte D’App…
  5. 5. For rhetoricians, the seminal article distinguishing technical and public spheres is G. Thomas Goodnight, …
Show all 72 →
  1. 6. Christian Kock and Lisa S. Villadsen, “Introduction: Citizenship as Rhetorical Practice,” in Rhetorical Ci…
  2. 7. Kock and Villadsen, “Citizenship as Rhetorical Practice,” 4.
  3. 8. Carolyn R. Miller, “The Presumptions of Expertise: The Role of Ethos in Risk Analysis,” Configurations 11 …
  4. 9. Miller, “The Presumptions of Expertise,” 201.
  5. Poroi
  6. 11. Heather E. Douglas, Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal (Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh P…
  7. 12. Thomas H. Jordan quoted in Edwin Cartlidge, “Prison Terms for L’Aquila Experts Shock Scientists,” Science…
  8. 13. Thomas H. Jordan, "Scapegoat Shocker," New Scientist, September 24, 2011, 35. See also Nicola Nosengo, "L…
  9. and Stephen S. Hall, "At Fault?" Nature, September 15, 2011, 264-69.
  10. 14. Massimo Mazzotti, “Seismic Shift: Lessons from the L’Aquila Earthquake Trial,” Times Higher Education, Oc…
  11. 15. Emina Herovic, Timothy L. Sellnow, and Kathryn E. Anthony, “Risk Communication as Interacting Arguments: …
  12. 16. Marouf Hasian Jr., Nicholas S. Paliewicz, and Robert W. Gehl, “Earthquake Controversies, the L’Aquila Tri…
  13. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  14. 18. Danielle DeVasto, “Being Expert: L’Aquila and Issues of Inclusion in Science-Policy Decision Making,” Soc…
  15. 19. Sally Jackson, “Black Box Arguments and Accountability of Experts to the Public,” in Between Scientists a…
  16. 20. Italy v. Major Risks Commission, N. 380/12 R. Sent. (2012), 836.
  17. Rhetoric Review
  18. and Michael Leff, "Isocrates, Tradition, and the Rhetorical Version of Civic Education," in Isocrates and Civ…
  19. Advances in the History of Rhetoric
  20. 23. Kock and Villadsen, “Citizenship as Rhetorical Practice,” 1–2.
  21. 24. Robert Asen, “A Discourse Theory of Citizenship,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 90 (2004): 191.
  22. 25. Christian Kock and Lisa Villadsen, “Introduction. Rhetorical Citizenship as Conceptual Frame: What We Tal…
  23. 26. Kwame Anthony Appiah, “The Democratic Spirit,” Daedalus 142 (2013): 215.
  24. 27. Alan Irwin and Brian Wynne, “Introduction,” in Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Sci…
  25. 28. Sheila Jasanoff, “A Mirror for Science,” Public Understanding of Science 23 (2014): 24.
  26. 29. Rolf Lidskog, “Scientised Citizens and Democratised Science: Re-assessing the Expert-Lay Divide,” Journal…
  27. 30. Lidskog, “Scientised Citizens,” 71.
  28. 31. Lidskog, “Scientised Citizens,” 79–80.
  29. 32. To be fair, when scientists render the expert realm more inviting to the public by making explicit their …
  30. 33. Lidskog, “Scientised Citizens,” 69–70.
  31. 34. Lidskog, “Scientised Citizens,” 70, 82.
  32. 35. Silvio O. Funtowicz and Jerome R. Ravetz, "Science for the Post-Normal Age," Futures 25 (1993): 739-55
  33. and Alan Irwin, "Constructing the Scientific Citizen: Science and Democracy in the Bioscience," Public Unders…
  34. 36. Italy v. Major Risks Commission, N. 380/12 R. Sent. (2012), 94.
  35. 37. Italy v. Major Risks Commission, N. 380/12 R. Sent. (2012), 93–94.
  36. 38. In the last days of March 2009, the media announcement of the upcoming MRC meeting was sharing the local …
  37. 39. The six experts and De Bernadinis are often referred to collectively in the literature as the “L’Aquila S…
  38. 40. Italy v. Major Risks Commission, N. 380/12 R. Sent. (2012), 95.
  39. 41. For an account of the controversy about the MRC minutes, see Pietrucci, “Voices from the Seismic Crater,” 278.
  40. 42. Italy v. Major Risks Commission, N. 380/12 R. Sent. (2012), 101. An earlier version of this translation a…
  41. 43. Italy v. Major Risks Commission, N. 380/12 R. Sent. (2012), 101.
  42. 44. PM Memo, Italy v. Major Risks Commission, Proc. Pen. 253/10 R.G. Noti (2011), 213.
  43. 45. Italy v. Major Risks Commission, N. 380/12 R. Sent. (2012), 137.
  44. 46. PM Memo, Italy v. Major Risks Commission, Proc. Pen. 253/10 R.G. Noti (2011), 219.
  45. 47. PM Memo, Italy v. Major Risks Commission, Proc. Pen. 253/10 R.G. Noti (2011), 122–23.
  46. 48. Italy v. Major Risks Commission, N. 380/12 R. Sent. (2012), 141.
  47. 49. Italy v. Major Risks Commission, N. 380/12 R. Sent. (2012), 102.
  48. 50. PM Memo, Italy v. Major Risks Commission, Proc. Pen. 253/10 R.G. Noti (2011), 112. The fact that she coun…
  49. 51. PM Memo, Italy v. Major Risks Commission, Proc. Pen. 253/10 R.G. Noti (2011), 112.
  50. 52. From the testimony of defendants Eva and Boschi in the prosecutors’ memo: PM Memo, Italy v. Major Risks C…
  51. 53. Italy v. Major Risks Commission, N. 380/12 R. Sent. (2012), 268.
  52. 54. Italy v. Major Risks Commission, N. 380/12 R. Sent. (2012), 268.
  53. 55. “Video Rai.TV—Presa Diretta—Irresponsabili—Presa Diretta Del 20/01/2013,” http://www.rai.tv/dl/RaiTV/prog…
  54. 56. “Video Rai.TV.” The quoted sentence appears at minute 12:30.
  55. 57. PM Memo, Italy v. Major Risks Commission, Proc. Pen. 253/10 R.G. Noti (2011), 221.
  56. 58. PM Memo, Italy v. Major Risks Commission, Proc. Pen. 253/10 R.G. Noti (2011), 219.
  57. 59. PM Memo, Italy v. Major Risks Commission, Proc. Pen. 253/10 R.G. Noti (2011), 214.
  58. 60. Italy v. Major Risks Commission, N. 380/12 R. Sent. (2012), 836.
  59. 61. “Video Rai.TV.” The sentence quoted appears between minute 23:35 and 25:00. Guido Bertolaso was also indi…
  60. 62. On the night of the meeting, the 8 PM edition of the main national state TV (TG1 RAI National) newscast r…
  61. 63. Enzo Boschi, “L’Aquila’s Aftershocks Shake Scientists,” Science, September 27, 2013, 1451.
  62. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  63. and Dennis S. Gouran, Randy Y. Hirokawa, and Amy E. Martz, "A Critical Analysis of Factors Related to Decisio…
  64. and Dennis S. Gouran, "The Failure of Argument in Decisions Leading to the 'Challenger Disaster': A Two-Level…
  65. 65. Gouran, Hirokawa, and Martz, “A Critical Analysis of Factors,” 124.
  66. 66. Alan G. Gross and Arthur Walzer, “The Challenger Disaster and the Revival of Rhetoric in Organizational L…
  67. 67. Gross and Walzer, “The Challenger Disaster,” 88.