Podcast Summary: "Manual para informarse sobre ciencia (en los medios de comunicación)"

Podcast: Más de uno
Host: OndaCero (Carlos Alsina)
Guest: Alberto Aparici
Date: January 8, 2026

Overview

In this episode, Carlos Alsina and regular science collaborator Alberto Aparici use humor and critical thinking to explore how the public can better inform themselves about science news in the media. Through a playful "library" segment and an imaginary book by Aparici, the discussion centers on skepticism, media literacy, and practical tips—a “manual”—for navigating scientific headlines and avoiding misinformation.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

The Premise: Navigating Science News

• Fantastical Claims & Skepticism ([03:40], [05:02])

  • Aparici introduces the idea that distinguishing credible science stories from dubious claims is tricky for citizens, especially with attention-grabbing headlines about aliens or vaccines.
  • Humorously, the segment is framed around an imaginary book, "Manual de supervivencia para oyentes picuetos," which serves as a vehicle for Aparici’s key advice.

• Media’s Treatment of Science News ([08:09])

  • There's a candid acknowledgement that science rarely makes front-page news, except in exceptional circumstances.
  • Apparent skepticism is encouraged: “Si fuera súper importante, habría abierto el telediario.” (If it were really important, it’d be on the news headlines.)

The "Manual": Four Key Rules

1. Rule 1: Extraordinary Claims, Ordinary Coverage ([07:19]–[08:50])

   • “Cuando veáis una afirmación así, mirad si solo está en la sección de ciencia, por favor … Si ha sido relegado a la sección de ciencia, es que alguien pensó que esto no era muy relevante.”
     (Alberto Aparici, 07:25)
   • A genuinely world-changing scientific event (e.g., discovery of extraterrestrial life) would not be confined to the science section.

2. Rule 2: Beware Your Own Desires ([12:02])

   • “Cuidado con lo que deseas, porque es donde vas a poner la guardia más baja.”
     (Alberto Aparici, 12:02)
   • Audiences are often less critical with stories they want to believe—so personal bias makes us susceptible.
   • News falls into two tempting categories: “Antes y después en la historia” (e.g., life on Mars, historic discoveries) and stories that “afectan directamente a nuestras vidas” (e.g., health scares, vaccines) ([09:36]).

3. Rule 3: Read Beyond the Headline ([13:01])

   • “Lean por favor el artículo completo … lo que hay dentro del artículo es más modesto.”
     (Alberto Aparici, 13:01)
   • Most headlines exaggerate, but the article content is typically more modest and accurate.
   • “Si el titular te flipa, pero lo que hay dentro es más modesto, dale crédito a lo modesto: probablemente es verdad.” ([13:40])
   • There’s a recognized tension: honest headlines don’t attract clicks, but reading deeper brings a more nuanced story ([14:42]).

4. Rule 4: Seek Trusted Sources ([16:15])

   • “Buscad referentes informativos fiables. Por favor, no os creáis al primero que veáis en TikTok.”
     (Alberto Aparici, 16:15)
   • Trustworthy sources are consistent over time; “fiable” does not mean they always confirm your beliefs, but that they are reliable and don’t contradict themselves frequently.
   • “Si encontráis a gente que de verdad es consistente, bueno, pues a lo mejor esta gente le podéis dar un poquito de pábulo.” ([16:39])

Reflection on Journalism and Audience Roles

• Journalists & the Science Beat ([08:20], [12:59])

  • The group jokes about science sections being a lower priority and the pressures of “clickbait.”
  • Aparici clarifies he doesn't see most science reporting as deliberately false, but often less important than the headline suggests.

• Audience Complicity ([11:27])

  • Popularity of certain stories is amplified by readers’ own desires and biases.
  • Aparici: “La trampa nos la tiende nuestro propio cerebro.”

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On headlines that awe and mislead:

  • “Cuando hay una pregunta en un titular, el 99% de las veces la respuesta es no.”
    (Alberto Aparici, 15:43)

• On reliable information:

  • “Fiable no significa que te dé la razón o que diga lo que tú crees que es verdad.”
    (Alberto Aparici, 16:17)

• On the role of the audience:

  • “Cuidado con lo que deseas…”
    (Alberto Aparici, 12:02)

• Humorous banter:

  • “Los Reyes se apuntan también cosas que no han traído ellos…”
    (Carlos Alsina, 00:42)
  • “Si aprendér fuera la primera prioridad, otras noticias estarían en portada…”
    (Alberto Aparici, 08:58)

• On journalistic dilemmas:

  • “El titular tiene que interesar lo suficiente al lector…”
    (Carlos Alsina, 14:15)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [03:40] Entering the "library"; the setup for skepticism and “fake” science claims.
• [05:02] Aparici reads the “preface” of his imaginary manual.
• [07:19] Start of the four core rules for media literacy.
• [09:36] Explanation of why some stories seduce both journalists and audiences.
• [12:02] Rule 2: "Beware your desires"—audience responsibility.
• [13:01] Rule 3: Read the whole article.
• [14:15] Discussion on the pressure to craft attractive headlines.
• [16:15] Rule 4: Seek consistent and reliable sources.

Takeaways

Alberto Aparici’s Four Rules for Science News Literacy:

1. If an extraordinary claim is only in the science section, beware—it likely isn't as important as it sounds.
2. Be wary of stories that confirm your hopes or fears; check your own biases.
3. Don’t stop at the headline—read the full story to gauge the true significance.
4. Stick with trustworthy, consistent sources—don’t put your faith in viral, unverified content.

Through wit and thoughtful critique, the hosts encourage listeners to become more discerning consumers of science journalism by recognizing exaggeration, checking biases, digging deeper, and selectively trusting credible sources.

End of Summary