Thesis title: What is the place of science in society? Media and social debates about science in Brazil and France: a study of Social Representations based on COVID-19
This doctoral thesis investigated the trajectory of arguments about science among social groups involved in the COVID-19 controversy at the reified and social levels in Brazil and France, based on the Social Representations Theory (SRT). The study focused on the articulation between scientific knowledge (reified universe) and socially shared knowledge (consensual universe) in three communication spheres: parliamentary, press media, and social networks (specifically, Twitter, now called X). To this end, a qualitative, exploratory, and comparative research was conducted, analyzing extensive corpora from parliamentary commissions of inquiry, online press media articles, and tweets from both countries. Lexicographical analysis (HDC), social network analysis (SNA), and critical discourse analysis (CDA) were used to identify arguments about science and to map discursive patterns and identity positions. The results confirm that science was a symbolic and highly politicized battlefield, with arguments circulating and being amplified across these spheres. In Brazil, the debate was marked by intense polarization, with science instrumentalized for political and ideological purposes, focusing on governmental denialism and ethical violations (e.g., Chloroquine, Prevent Senior). In France, the focus was on the crisis of institutional authority, methodological disputes (e.g., Didier Raoult), and criticism of governmental management. Thus, science was mobilized as an identity marker to differentiate antagonistic groups, and the infodemic and the post-truth context, along with an interconnected communicational ecosystem, amplified this polarization. It is concluded that the polarization and instrumentalization of science affect public trust and reconfigure the relationships between society, politics, and science in both nations.