--- author: TED date: '2026-09-21' guest: '' layout: post.njk source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRmIrFhce04 speaker: TED tags: - science-communication - public-health - infodemic - misinformation - trust-repair title: 信息疫情时代的科学传播：如何在信任破裂中重建连接与勇敢发声 summary: 流行病学家兼科学传播专家杰西卡·马拉蒂·里维拉在 TEDNext 探讨了当下公共卫生领域的领导力挑战。她分享了如何直面科学被政治化的现实，借助讲故事、承认不确定性以及多学科协作来化解“信息疫情”，并在信任赤字中重建专家与公众之间的桥梁。 insight: '' draft: true series: '' category: politics-society area: society-thinking project: [] people: - Jessica Malaty Rivera companies_orgs: - TED - UNICEF products_models: [] media_books: [] status: evergreen --- ### 重新定义公共卫生中的领导力 **惠特妮·佩宁顿·罗杰斯**: 嗨，杰西卡，大家早上好。非常激动能和你一起坐在这里参加 **TEDNext** 的首场研讨，以一种我认为对在座所有人而言都极具意义的方式来探讨**领导力（Leadership）**。在这场名为“引领（Lead）”的环节中，这或许是一个极佳的切入点。你能否告诉我们，你是如何定义“领导力”这个词的，特别是结合你在**公共卫生（public health）**和**传染病流行病学（infectious disease epidemiology）**领域的工作背景？
Original English **Whitney Pennington Rodgers**: Hi, Jessica. And hello, everyone. It is so exciting to be able to sit here with you for this very first session at TEDNext, and to talk about leadership in a way that I think will be really meaningful for all of us here. And maybe that's a really great place to start in this session called Lead. Could you tell us how you define the term "leadership," especially as it relates to your work in public health and infectious disease epidemiology?
**杰西卡·马拉蒂·里维拉**: 好的，非常感谢你们邀请我。能和大家同聚一堂，我感到无比兴奋。“领导力”在公共卫生或流行病学领域并不总是一个经常被提及的词汇，但在过去几年中，伴随我们所经历的全球疫情，这个词出现的频率显著增加了。在我过去的经历和所接受的专业训练中，我始终看到一个巨大的人才缺口和迫切需求——那就是**让专业知识变得通俗易懂（making it make sense to people）**。 这正是属于我的领导力契机。这是让我能够站出来发问的机会：“我们该如何让公众与这项工作产生连接？”现有的体系非常孤立、严重割裂。如果我们要讨论的是那些直接影响人们的**决策制定（decision making）**、**风险预算（risk budgets）**、人际关系以及社区构建方式的事情，我该如何介入其中，去弥合学术界、顶尖机构与它们理应服务的广大公众之间的鸿沟？
Original English **Jessica Malaty Rivera**: Yeah. Thank you so much for having me. I am so excited to be here in this room with all of you. Leadership isn't always a word that is used necessarily in public health or epidemiology, but it probably has been much more in the last several years as we've just experienced with the pandemic. And one thing that I always saw that was needed and lacking, and a huge gap in the training that I got, was making it make sense to people. And that was my opportunity to lead. That was my opportunity to say, "How can we connect people to this work?" It's very siloed. It's very separate. And if we're talking about things that influence people's decision making and risk budgets and relationships, and how they build community, how can I step in and bridge the gap between academia, fancy institutions and the public that it's intending to serve?
### 逆境中的无畏领导力与科学的政治现实 **惠特妮·佩宁顿·罗杰斯**: 确实，似乎没有什么比在处于逆境、不被看好的时刻更能检验真正的领导力了。我们知道，当前无论是在美国本土还是在国际上，公共卫生和科学本身都在遭受质疑。因此我很想听听，当你的工作、甚至你所从事事业的基石得不到支持、在某些情况下甚至遭受攻击时，你是如何看待这种**勇敢的领导力（courageous leadership）**的？
Original English **Whitney Pennington Rodgers**: And, you know, it seems like there really is no truer test of leadership than in moments where you're doing it in times of unfavorability. And we know right now that public health and science is being questioned -- especially in the United States, but abroad. And so I'm interested to hear how you think about courageous leadership in times where your work, the very foundation of what you're doing, is unsupported, and in some cases, even under attack.
**杰西卡·马拉蒂·里维拉**: 好的。一个可能会引起争议的观点是：**我认为科学本身具有政治性，因为我们需要优质的科学来指导我们的政治**。我们需要数据来为制定决策的各项政策提供依据，并以此让整个社会系统为公众所用。然而，这两者之间的关键区别在于：**科学不应该被政治化（politicized）**。 因此，对我而言，在这一领域展现勇敢的领导力、展现无畏的姿态，就意味着明确指出这一点，并主动与立法者沟通，与倡导组织建立连接，甚至我自己亲自承担大量此类桥梁工作，以使这种连接更加清晰透明。在科学与政策之间，如果我们越是彼此孤立割裂，那些极其危险的错误事实、虚假指控与阴谋论就有越多的空间来填补这一真空。因此，如果我们不用科学的语言并将其翻译出来，使制定这些法律与政策的人能够理解，同时也让那些用选票和声音选举他们的公众能够理解，那么我们就会错失一个真正确保每个人都能在这些科学政策中获得代表性的宝贵机会。
Original English **Jessica Malaty Rivera**: Yeah. A potentially unpopular opinion is I do think science is political because we need good science to inform our politics. We need data to inform the policies that make decisions and make systems available to our public. And what the difference is, though, is that it shouldn't be politicized. And so what courageous leadership, what being bold in that space has looked like for me, is saying that and connecting with lawmakers, and connecting with advocacy groups, and even doing a lot of that work myself to make that connection more clear. The more siloed we are when it comes to science and policy, the more opportunity there is for really dangerous mistruths and false claims and conspiracies to fill that gap. And so if we're not using the language of science and translating it so that people who are making these laws and policies understand them, and the people who are using their votes and voices to elect them, then we're missing an opportunity to really make sure that everybody is represented in these science policies.
### 在高压与对立环境中传递不讨喜的真相 **惠特妮·佩宁顿·罗杰斯**: 顺着你刚才所说的——你一直处于这种紧张局势的核心位置，在一个常常充斥着情绪化对立的环境中去传播这些复杂且不受欢迎的真相。当你的受众所面临的政治和个人利益赌注都极其巨大时，你如何在领导中兼顾关怀与勇气？
Original English **Whitney Pennington Rodgers**: And I think -- to sort of piggyback on what you’re just saying here -- you have stood at the center of this tension of communicating these complex, unpopular truths in what can feel like a very emotionally charged environment. How do you practice care and courage and leading in moments where it feels like the political and personal stakes are really high for people in your audience?
**杰西卡·马拉蒂·里维拉**: 是的，这非常不容易。回顾过去的几年，我认为收益终究大于付出。但是，讲出真相——对某些人而言令人不适的真相——确实让我个人付出了巨大的代价，包括我自身的安全以及我的家庭安全。即使重来一次，我也不会选择放弃发声，但如果我不承认我们正生活在一个极其危险的时代——在这个时代里，我们竟然在重新争论早已确立的科学事实——那就是我的失职了。 我寻求内心笃定以及坚持下去的方式，就是不断提醒自己那个“为什么（Why）”——正是我的孩子们给予了我做这份工作的初衷与使命。同时，我也在其他同样热衷于“让科学通俗易懂”并致力于启发公众的科学家群体中找到了团结与共鸣。对我而言，这些都是**工具箱里的工具（tools in a toolkit）**。我不想为任何人把知识“傻瓜化”；我想做的是**提升公众在科学与复杂事物上的素养（elevate people's literacy）**。我并不指望普通人能记住我所必须掌握的所有关于生物学和免疫学的专业细节，那要求太高了。但我坚信，在当下极度危险的信息生态系统中，这些基础认知是每个人前行所必需的重要工具。
Original English **Jessica Malaty Rivera**: Yeah, it's not easy. You know, I think that when I look back in the last several years, the good outweighs the bad. But speaking truth, uncomfortable truth for some people, has come at great cost to myself, my safety, my family. I wouldn't go back and not do it, but I'd be remiss if I didn't include the fact that we're living in some pretty dangerous times where we're relitigating established truth, and a way that I have sought groundedness, a way that I have continued, is to remind myself of that why, of the purpose that is my children who inspired me to do that work. And in finding solidarity with other scientists who are passionate about making science make sense and informing people, so that ... To me, it's tools in a toolkit. I don't want to dumb anything down for anybody. I want to elevate people's literacy in science and complex things. I'm not expecting people to remember all the things that I have to remember about biology and immunology. That's asking too much. But I do think that these are important tools for people to have to navigate really dangerous information ecosystems right now.
### 双重疫情下的信任危机与差异化沟通 **惠特妮·佩宁顿·罗杰斯**: 我认为这里面蕴含着深刻的启示，不仅关乎我们如何吸收和思考这些信息，也关乎如何成为一名领导者。我很想进一步了解你在实践中是如何操作的。因为尽管你是从公共卫生的角度切入，但我们所有人其实都在应对一个高度分裂的时代。那么，你如何决定在何时应该大声疾呼？何时保持沉默更为合适？又在何时应当坚定地表明立场？你是如何做出这些决断的？
Original English **Whitney Pennington Rodgers**: And I think there's a lesson there, not in just how you can consume this information and think about it, but also as a leader. And I'd love to hear more about how you actually do this because of course, you're doing this from the space of public health, but all of us are sort of navigating what feels like a really divisive moment. And so how do you decide what is a great place for you to speak up? When is it better for you to be quiet? When is it good for you to take a stand? How do you make those decisions?
**杰西卡·马拉蒂·里维拉**: 好的。我之所以进入公共卫生领域，是因为公共卫生的核心是**利他主义（altruism）**。它源于减少伤害、预防疾病、增加人们延年益寿并在漫长生命中茁壮成长的愿望。因此，我的底线在于：当某些信息——尤其是**有害的健康虚假信息**——威胁或破坏了这些目标时，我就必须站出来。 我认为，当我们经历突发公共卫生危机时，实际上是在同时应对**两场并行的爆发**：一场是**病原体的爆发**，另一场则是**信息的爆发（信息疫情）**。而当今的信息从来都不是中立的。我们必须认识到，这种缺乏中立性的信息往往是加速疫情蔓延的推动器——事实也往往如此。那么我们该如何同时应对这两者？我们在公共卫生领域有时会显得有些目光短浅，只关注单一的病原体威胁。 但我坚信，拥有这种审视“双重爆发”的宏观视野才是未来的破局之道。这意味着我不能仅仅去构思我们需要推行哪些干预措施，我还必须深入探讨：到底是谁未能理解这些信息？他们对这些事情抱有怎样的情绪？他们是在感到恐惧吗？他们觉得自己被遗忘了吗？他们过去曾被医疗体系伤害过吗？如果答案是肯定的，我就需要加倍努力去重新赢回他们的信任。 我经常思考**“获得信任（trust）”与“值得信任（trustworthiness）”**之间的区别。面对我正在对话的人群，我自身是否配得上他们的信任去说出这些话，而不是简单地要求他们：“相信我吧，我是科学家；相信我吧，我是专家。”我们现在处于一个完全不同的世界，信任与专业知识变得极为主观。人们如今更倾向于放弃纯粹的专业知识，转而选择那些更熟悉、更能产生身份认同的事物。因此，我做了大量的基层倾听，去深入了解人群，因为这项工作绝非“一刀切”的模式，它必须高度定制化并精准聚焦于个体。
Original English **Jessica Malaty Rivera**: Yeah. I got into public health because at the core of public health is altruism. It is a desire to reduce harm, to prevent disease, to increase people's opportunity for long life and thriving in that long life. And so my red line is when information, specifically harmful health information, challenges or jeopardizes those things. And I do think that, you know, when we're experiencing public health emergencies, we're kind of dealing with two outbreaks. We're dealing with an outbreak of a pathogen and an outbreak of information. And information today is not neutral. And we need to recognize that that lack of neutrality means that that is probably an accelerating driver of that epidemic -- and it often is. And how do we address both? We sometimes get a little myopic with public health and just think about the one threat. And so I do think that having this big picture view of tandem outbreaks is the way we go forward with this. It's the way for me to say, I can't just think about all the interventions that we need to have -- I need to talk about who doesn't understand this and what are they feeling about these things? Are they scared? Are they feeling forgotten? Have they been hurt by the system in the past? So I'm going to work a little bit extra hard to regain their trust. I think a lot about the difference of trust and trustworthiness. Am I even worthy of the trust of the people I'm speaking to, to say these things, instead of asking them, "Just trust me, I'm a scientist. Trust me, I'm an expert." We're now in a different world where trust and expertise [are] really subjective. And people are now choosing to, you know, abandon expertise for the sake of things that are more familiar, things that they identify with. And so I do a lot of that ground level listening and hearing people to understand this is not a one-size-fits-all type of work. It really is hypertailored and hyperfocused on individuals.
### 故事的力量：用人性连接数据与公众决策 **惠特妮·佩宁顿·罗杰斯**: 这让我联想到了**讲故事（storytelling）**的重要性。你之前曾说过一句话：**“单纯的数据无法改变人的想法，故事才可以。”**因此，当你面对公众可能对你所说内容背后的实际数据或科学缺乏信任时，你如何将讲故事作为展现勇气和领导力的工具？
Original English **Whitney Pennington Rodgers**: And, you know, this makes me think about the importance of storytelling. And I have something that you've said before, that data alone doesn't change minds. Stories do. And so how do you use storytelling as a tool for courage and leading when you're thinking about people potentially not having trust in some of the actual data or science behind some of what you're saying?
**杰西卡·马拉蒂·里维拉**: 我经常深入思考这个问题……科学界有句名言：**“个案的累加不等于数据（Plural of anecdote is not data）。”**这话确实没错。但不可否认的是，个案故事对人们的决策制定有着极其重大的影响力。因此，我们绝不能忽视一个个具体生动的故事在帮助人们将科学知识与科学决策连接起来时所发挥的巨大作用。 我自己在这方面投入了大量精力。我认为这是一个更缓慢的过程，对我所在领域的许多同行来说可能显得不够高效，但我依然坚持以此为先导。我从不回避自己所拥有的多重身份。在身为科学家与意义阐释者之外，我还是三个年幼孩子的母亲。我把养育他们以及为他们的健康做决策的亲身经历作为示范，向公众展现我曾经有过的任何疑虑和担忧。 如果我不承认自己曾经历过**产后焦虑症（postpartum anxiety）**并且这深刻影响了我所做的很多决策，那我就是在说谎。但这并没有阻止我做出那些我全力支持的科学选择；相反，我极其透明地分享了整个思考过程。我认为，将专业受训专家的真实人性与他们试图服务的公众紧密连接起来，这种做法能够产生深远的影响。
Original English **Jessica Malaty Rivera**: I think about this so much because ... There’s a phrase: “Plural of anecdote is not data.” It's true. But anecdotes do have a significant influence on people's decision making, and so we can't ignore the fact that an individual story can go a really long way in helping people connect science to science decision making. And I do that a lot myself. I think it's a slower process, which may not be as efficient for many folks in my space, but I lead with that. I don't walk away from the many identities that I have. On top of being a scientist and a sense maker, I'm a mom to three young kids, and I use my experience of parenting them and making decisions about their health as a way to show my example, as a way to show any doubts that I had, any concerns that I had. And I would be lying if I didn't recognize the fact that I had postpartum anxiety, and that influenced a lot of the decisions that I made. It didn't cause me to not make some choices that I fully support, but the thought process, I shared that very, very transparently, and I think that it can go a long way when it comes to connecting the humanity of the people who are trained and experts to the people that they're trying to serve.
### 从“疫苗”到“接种”：公共卫生的传播赤字 **惠特妮·佩宁顿·罗杰斯**: 我们经常听到一种说法，认为公共卫生存在“传播沟通问题”。你刚才也提到了对于信息包装与传递方式的见解。你认为问题的本质仅仅在于此吗？还是说在单纯的信息包装之外，还有更深层次的问题在发生？
Original English **Whitney Pennington Rodgers**: I think we often hear that public health has a messaging problem. And I think you're speaking to some of the ways that you think about how to message things. Do you think that that's what it is? Or is there something bigger happening there beyond just the way things are packaged?
**杰西卡·马拉蒂·里维拉**: 我认为确实存在明显的传播问题。如果非要归结为一个核心原因，那就是：**传播往往被当成事后诸葛亮的附带考量（an afterthought）**。公共卫生界经常会重复一些在我看来如今已毫无意义的口号，比如“疫苗有效，疫苗拯救生命”。 我现在甚至都不想再说这些话了，因为真正发挥作用的不是冷冰冰的“疫苗（vaccine）”，而是**“接种行动（vaccination）”**。这或许是我作为文字偏执狂的一种咬文嚼字，但当你仔细思考“疫苗”与“接种”的区别时，连接这两者的是什么？**是一条由值得信赖的传递者所发出的受信信息**。 那么我们该如何把生产出来的疫苗真正转化为民众的接种行动呢？靠的就是沟通交流。必须确保临床试验的数据清晰易懂，确保研发这些干预措施的过程公开透明、毫无利益冲突，并且经得起公众的严密审视。我是如何做的？我去做翻译工作，耐心地花时间解释。虽然过程极其费力，但目前社会对这一环节的投入却严重不足。我们在研发上投入了数十亿美元——这确实是获取救命干预手段所必需的巨额投资——但随后我们却想当然地以为有效的传播信息会自动伴随而来。 理解这一点需要特殊的专业训练和独特的思维格局：科学成果绝不会被理所当然地接受，我们所面对的是一个经历过极其复杂艰难体验的多样化世界。在过去五年里，对于每一个生活在当下的普通人而言，信任都不应被预设为理所当然的存在。**信任本身就是决定人们健康与决策的关键因素**。因此，如果我们不在科学传播上进行投资，我们耗费巨资打造的这些工具就只能在角落里蒙尘，无法发挥应有的作用。
Original English **Jessica Malaty Rivera**: I think that there is definitely a messaging problem. And I would probably say it's because of one specific thing. It's often considered an afterthought. You know, there are these meaningless -- I say meaningless now -- sentences that we say in public health. "Vaccines work, vaccines save lives." I don't even know if I want to say those sentences anymore because it’s really not a vaccine -- it’s a vaccination. And that's just the word nerd in me making the distinction. But if you think about the difference between a vaccine and a vaccination, what connects those things? A message, a trusted message from a trusted messenger. And so how do we turn those vaccines into vaccinations? It's communicating. It's making sure that the data from those clinical trials makes sense. It's making sure that the process of getting to these interventions is transparent and clear, and without conflicts of interest, and without all the things that are constantly scrutinized. And so how do I do that? I translate. I take my time. It's laborious, but there's not a lot of investment in this. We spend billions of dollars on the R&D, necessary billions, truly, to get these lifesaving interventions. But then we just think that the messages are going to exist alongside [them]. And it takes a special kind of training and a special kind of mind to know that it's not going to just be accepted, and that we are dealing with a very diverse world with a very, very, you know, difficult experience. Now behind anybody who’s lived in the last five years, trust should not be assumed. Trust is a determinant of people's decision making and their health. So if we're not investing in communications, then we're just going to be creating these tools that will collect dust and not be used.
### 重建信任的长征与多学科协作 **惠特妮·佩宁顿·罗杰斯**: 看起来，“信任”不仅在你所在的领域，在很多领域都是如此——随着虚假信息的泛滥，人们对公众人物以及传统权威声音的信任发生了断裂。面对这种局面，你该如何着手去重建信任、修复那些可能已被破坏的关系？
Original English **Whitney Pennington Rodgers**: It seems like trust -- definitely in your space, but I think in so many areas -- we're seeing that with the rise of misinformation, that there is this sort of fracture in the way people trust public figures, they trust voices that previously wouldn't have been trusted. How do you tackle rebuilding that and repairing what might have been damaged?
**杰西卡·马拉蒂·里维拉**: 是的，这是一场持久战。破坏信任往往只需要极短的时间，而建立和修复信任却需要漫长的过程。作为一名母亲，我深知修复关系的艰难，我在生活中不断在孩子们面前践行并示范这一点。我一直在思考更宏观的图景：当某些东西破裂时，缝合它需要漫长的时间。 我们需要做大量工作来正视过去五年所造成的深重创伤与痛苦。我认为正因如此，科学必须变得更加**跨学科（multidisciplinary）**。这绝不仅仅是传染病专家单独掌舵就能解决的，它需要社会学家、心理学家、心理咨询师，乃至政治家和战略家们共同携手，一起构想重获公众信任的道路究竟是怎样的。 让我夜不能寐的是，我和科学界并不是唯一意识到这一点的人。我们正目睹一场关于“信任”的拉锯战，许多词汇正在失去其原有的意义，甚至连“信任”本身也是如此。究竟什么是“可信的”？什么是“循证的（evidence-based）”？什么是“金标准（gold standard）”？ 因此，我深感自己必须做的一项工作，就是以高度的透明度去**揭示科学背后的全套运作机制**。使用“揭示”这个词或许显得有些强烈，但我之所以这么说，是因为公众一直觉得自己被排斥在科学过程之外，却被要求盲目跟从、顺从照办。我认为这种方式是错误的。我坚信专业知识有其不可替代的价值，专家们也绝对应当参与并主导许多决策与建议的制定。 但在修复信任的过程中，很大一部分工作要回归到最基本的表态，那就是敢于承认：**“我不知道”**，或者**“我暂时还不清楚”**。这往往会让很多科学家感到坐立难安。缺乏确定性确实不是一个让人感觉舒服的状态。但如果你仔细想想，**正是这种不确定性才驱动我们所有人成为科学家的，不是吗？**正是因为我想找到未知事物的答案，或者探索那些我尚未完全明确的关联。那么，我们该如何回归科学方法、科学假说以及得出结论的探索过程本身，而不是一开始就带着绝对的确定性和非黑即白的二元思维？
Original English **Jessica Malaty Rivera**: Yeah, it's a long game. You know, I think it takes a lot less time to break trust than it does to build it and to repair it. I know the work of repair as a mom. I'm constantly doing that and modeling it with my children. And I keep thinking about the bigger picture of, you know, when there's something broken, the time it takes to mend that. There's a lot that needs to be done to recognize the deep hurt and trauma of the last five years. And I think that that's where we look at science as needing to be a lot more multidisciplinary. It's not just the infectious disease people at the helm, right? It needs to be the social scientists and the psychologists, and the therapists even, the politicians and the strategists all kind of together thinking about what does this road to regaining trust look like. And what keeps me up a little bit at night is knowing that myself and the scientific community [are] not the only one aware of that. You know, we're seeing like a tug of war over trust, and words are losing their meaning, including the word "trust." Like what is trusted? What is “evidence-based?” What is “gold standard?” And so part of the work that I feel really compelled to do is on exposing, you know, with deep transparency, all of the processes that go behind science. I mean, “exposing” is maybe an intense word, but I say that because people have felt left out of the process and just expected to follow suit, to just obey. And I don't think that that's the right way. I do think that there is a place for expertise, and experts should definitely be influencing a lot of these decisions and recommendations. But when it comes to repair, a lot of it is going to go back to the basics of saying, "I don't know." "I don't know yet." And that makes a lot of scientists squirm. You know, the lack of certainty is not a comfortable place. But if you think about it, the lack of certainty is why we all are scientists, right? It's me wanting to find an answer to an unknown, or to something that I don't fully know is connected to something else. So how do we go back to the basics of the scientific method, of a hypothesis, or of a process of getting to that conclusion and not coming in with so much certainty and binary thinking?
### 培养新一代科学传播者 **惠特妮·佩宁顿·罗杰斯**: 当你想到正在成长起来的年轻科学家时——甚至我想退一步说，因为你所分享的许多内容对其他领域的青年人也同样适用——当你看到那些试图传播思想的年轻人时，是什么让你对未来的走向、他们的探索路径以及他们处理问题的方式感到欣慰和充满希望？
Original English **Whitney Pennington Rodgers**: I think when you think about young scientists who are coming up, and I think -- I'll even take a step back because so much of what you're saying is so relevant to others as well. But when you think about young people who are coming up and looking to communicate ideas, what makes you feel good about where things might be headed and the direction that they might be taking and how they approach these things?
**杰西卡·马拉蒂·里维拉**: 很多年前，“科学传播者（science communicator）”这一角色对公众而言还非常陌生。甚至**“信息疫情（infodemic）”**或**“信息流行病学（infodemiology）”**这样的词汇也并未进入大多数人的日常词汇库。然而现在，这些概念已经广为人知了。 这让我倍感振奋，因为我们确实需要培养整整一代**既懂科学又善于传播科学的科学家**。如果科学成果仅仅停留在高等学府紧闭的象牙塔内，那么这项科学工作就是不完整的。除非一个人能够在餐桌旁把这个科学信息准确地转述给身边的同伴，否则这门科学就并未真正成为大众工具箱里的实用工具。 这也是为什么我对自己的工作充满热情。在某种程度上，我成为了很多人的“专属科学家”，他们可以直接叫出我的名字并对身边的人说：“这是我从杰西卡那里听来的，她是这么解释这个原理的……”这种**可复述的信息（repeatable messages）**，以及在整个社区中培养科学传播者的愿景，让我深受鼓舞。并不是每个人都需要接受完全相同的专业学术训练，只要他们能够转述这些科学常识让所有人都能听懂，那么即便身处这个充满挑战的信息生态系统中，我依然对未来怀揣希望。
Original English **Jessica Malaty Rivera**: I mean, the role of science communicator was not something that people were familiar with many years ago. And even the word "infodemic" or "infodemiology" was a word that was not in a lot of people's lexicon. And it now is. And that excites me, because I do think that what we need to do is train a generation of scientists who can communicate that science, because their work is incomplete if it's just sitting behind closed doors at fancy institutions. It's not actually a tool in somebody's toolkit unless somebody can repeat that message to somebody sitting next to them at the dinner table. And that's why I feel so passionate about the work that I do, that I somehow became a personal scientist to so many people who then could refer to me by first name and say, "Well, I heard this from Jessica and she explained it this way," these repeatable messages, this generation, hopefully, of creating science communicators in the whole community. And not everybody has to have the same training, but that they can repeat these messages so that everybody can understand, that, to me, makes me feel hopeful about the future, despite the fraught information ecosystem that we're living in.
### 让隐形的公共卫生显形：在攻击中坚持数据底气 **惠特妮·佩宁顿·罗杰斯**: 这段话非常美好。当你与那些担心自己无法打破信息壁垒、无法真正带来改变的人交流时，你会通过哪些方式鼓励他们坚持下去并继续这项事业？
Original English **Whitney Pennington Rodgers**: I think that's beautiful. And when you have these conversations with people who maybe feel concerned about how they can break through and make a difference, what are some of the ways in which you encourage them to keep going and to do this work?
**杰西卡·马拉蒂·里维拉**: 收益始终大于付出。我必须不断提醒自己，虽然现实中充斥着网络暴力、死亡威胁、敌意以及各种可怕的遭遇，但很多时候我们面对的只是“键盘侠（keyboard warriors）”，他们在现实中并没有网络上表现得那么勇敢。我绝不是在轻视真正的安全威胁，但我必须时刻提醒自己：在一天结束时，**我们有确凿的证据和严谨的数据来支撑我们所说的每一句话**。 这与你在对立面所面对的虚假言论有着本质区别。我相信，勇敢且坚持不懈地讲出真相已被证明是行之有效的，其成果体现在我们所看到的一切之中。公共卫生的奇妙之处在于：**很多时候，它的成效恰恰体现在你“看不到”的事情上**。从某种意义上说，公共卫生干预措施是“隐形”的，它们往往成了**自身成功的受害者**。因为当人们都健康平安时，说明公共卫生系统正在发挥作用，而这正是我们的终极目标——我们不希望看到人们出现大规模感染和死亡。 那么，我们该如何让这项“隐形”的工作被大众看见？唯有通过这种持续的回响、沟通，并邀请更多人参与到这个过程中来。因为如果我们只是想当然地认为它理所当然地存在而不去为之发声讨论，那么公共卫生系统就会遭遇预算削减、价值贬低以及优先级下调。而这正是导致我们在 2020 年陷入极度被动境地的根本原因。
Original English **Jessica Malaty Rivera**: Yeah. The good outweighs the bad. I have to keep reminding myself that, yes, there's violence and death threats and antagonism and a lot of scary things. Oftentimes, we're dealing with keyboard warriors and people who maybe are not as brave as they may sound on the internet. I'm not at all downplaying real threats, but I have to keep reminding myself that at the end of the day, we have evidence and data to back up the things that we say, with that caveat. That's different than what you're dealing with on the other side. And I think speaking that truth courageously, repeatedly has shown to be beneficial because of what we see. What's interesting about public health is a lot of times what we see is what we don't see. The interventions are invisible in that sense, and they're a victim of their own success. Because when people are doing well, public health is working, and that's what we want. We don't want people dying in mass and getting sick in mass. And so how do we make that invisible work visible? It's by this type of echoing and communicating and inviting more people into that process. Because if we just assume that it exists and we're not talking about it, that’s when the defunding happens. That’s when the devaluation happens. That's when the deprioritization of it happens. And that's kind of what got us into the terrible position we were in in 2020.
### 使命与坚守：让复杂而艰难的事物变得清晰 **惠特妮·佩宁顿·罗杰斯**: 在我们对话接近尾声之际，我很想知道，这一切在你的日常实践中具体是如何呈现的？你是如何找到源源不断的勇气，去坚持前行并持续深耕这项工作的？
Original English **Whitney Pennington Rodgers**: I'd love to know as we're winding down our conversation, just how this -- what this looks like for you. How does this show up in practice for you? How do you find the courage to keep going and keep doing this work?
**杰西卡·马拉蒂·里维拉**: 是的，我常常思考自己所扮演的多重角色。我时刻提醒自己，我不仅是一名流行病学家和科学传播者，我更是一位母亲，一名第一代美国移民。我始终随身携带着所有这些身份印记。我认为这正是一些人能够信任我的原因所在。 我也经常回想起那些不得不挺身而出的时刻——哪怕公开发声令人感到恐惧，不论是反对某一届政府、某位特定的政客，还是反对某个发表极其危险有害言论的特定人物。我的工作要求我直面许多至暗时刻：公共卫生系统的瓦解、极其危险的健康虚假信息，甚至是我们在全球各地所目睹的苦难。比如，我曾多次公开为加沙地带所发生的一切发声，因为这直接关系到公共卫生，关系到无辜的儿童。我自己就是年幼孩子的母亲，所有这些事物都是紧密相连的，而我选择以一种彼此连接的方式去阐述它们，因为我心中始终铭记着几句让我内心笃定的准则。 最近在随**联合国儿童基金会（UNICEF）**前往卢旺达进行实地考察时，这种信念得到了进一步的强化。卢旺达大屠杀距今刚刚过去三十年。二十年前——也就是大屠杀发生十年后——我曾亲身到访那里。我清楚地记得当时我曾暗自思忖：这里怎么可能还会有希望？这里该如何实现创伤修复？然而这一次，我亲眼见证了希望与修复。这让我再次叩问内心：我为什么要做我现在所做的事？我真正擅长的事情究竟是什么？ 我真诚地认为，我所擅长的是**“意义阐释（sense making）”**。我擅长将那些艰深、复杂且令人感到不适的事物，清晰易懂地解释给不同背景的群体。正是这一点赋予了我矢志不渝的使命感，而我的初心与信念在于：**为科学发声、为不公发声，并揭示这两者之间的内在联系，永远是正确的选择，永远值得全力以赴**。 这便是我不断提醒自己坚守这份事业的原因。坚守我做这件事的初衷，因为它对我而言至关重要。而且一路走来，我也切切实实看到了它所结出的丰硕果实。
Original English **Jessica Malaty Rivera**: Yeah, I think about all the hats that I wear. I think about the fact that I'm not just an epidemiologist and a science communicator. I'm a mom. I'm a first-generation American. I carry all these identities with me. And I think that's why I am trusted by some folks. And I think a lot about the times that I've had to speak up, when it has felt scary to speak up, whether it's in opposition to an administration or to a specific politician, or to a specific person who is making very dangerous, harmful claims. My work requires me to see a lot of dark things. You know, the dismantling of public health systems, really dangerous health misinformation. Even what we're witnessing over the world. You know, I very much have spoken out a lot about what's been happening in Gaza, as it is connected to public health, it is connected to children. I am a mom with kids, very young. All these things are connected, and I speak about these things in a connected way, because I remember a few words that really ground me. And this was really reinforced, most recently, [when] I was in Rwanda with UNICEF visiting a field site. Rwanda is just 30 years past the genocide. Something that I witnessed 20 years ago, when I was there, 10 years after the genocide, and I remember thinking, how can there be hope here? How can there be repair? And I saw it, and I remembered the question that I asked myself, like, why do I do what I do? What is the thing that I'm good at? And I really, genuinely think I'm good at sense making. I'm good at making hard, complicated, uncomfortable things make sense to different types of people. And so because of that, it gives me my why, and my why is that speaking up about science, about injustice, about the connection of those two things is always right. It's always worth it. And so that is how I keep reminding myself of the work that I do, the why that I do it because it's really important to me. And I've seen the fruitfulness of it all.
### 结语 **惠特妮·佩宁顿·罗杰斯**: 说得太好了。而且这是一种我们所有人都可以去付诸实践的行动。非常感谢你今天带来的精彩对话，也感谢你来到我们现场。
Original English **Whitney Pennington Rodgers**: That's beautiful. And it feels like that's something that maybe all of us can practice. Thank you so much for this conversation and for being here with us today.
**杰西卡·马拉蒂·里维拉**: 谢谢你，惠特妮。谢谢大家。 （掌声）
Original English **Jessica Malaty Rivera**: Thank you, Whitney. Thanks, everyone. (Applause)