journalism

For months, Spain has been preparing to host an astronomical milestone: a trio of solar eclipses that will be visible mainly from the peninsula, Ceuta, and Melilla. In addition to explaining what they are and why they are important, this article will tell you where to find expert sources to answer your questions about this fascinating phenomenon.

The end of the year is a good time to take stock. We love lists, but even more so, we love knowing what has interested you most from all we have published in 2025. So here are the 10 most-read articles—spoiler alert: yes, Trump and AI made it into the top ten.

The power of communication to represent violence against women has been on the table for scientific and social debate for more than two decades. However, after 25 years of manuals on how to address gender-based violence in journalism, inadequate coverage persists, still romanticising it or simplifying its approach as emotional violence.

The research article A bacterium that can grow by using arsenic instead of phosphorus was one of the big science stories because it discussed the possibility of arsenic-based life. However, it has been the subject of criticism until now. After nearly 15 years of debate and failed attempts by other groups to replicate the findings, Science has now decided to retract the article, despite finding no evidence of fraud or misconduct on the part of the authors, who disagree with the decision.

Competition to attract audiences encourages media outlets to spread misinformation, according to a study published in Science Advances. The research applies a mathematical framework - called a zero-sum game - to analyse the dynamics between immediate media benefits and long-term damage. The model showed how an ‘arms race’ can emerge between news sources: when one player resorts to misinformation, the other has to do the same in order to compete.

The report Participation of women scientists as expert sources in the media: motivations and obstacles, carried out by FECYT's SMC España with the Gureiker research group (UPV/EHU) analyses the data from a survey, a pioneer in Spain, on the factors that influence the media participation of scientists as expert voices. All the people contacted as information sources by the SMC Spain team were surveyed over a three-month period, starting in March 2024. Of the sources consulted, 43.91% were women and 56.09% were men. However, of the total number of people who accepted SMC's proposals and appeared as sources, 37.66% were women and 62.34% were men. The greater media exposure of male scientists benefits them for future interventions. In terms of barriers that prevent researchers from speaking in the media, lack of time due to family responsibilities affects female scientists (22.95 % of respondents) more than male scientists (10 %).