‘Let’s talk About’: Conversations on Surveillance in Swindon and Oxford.

In February and March 2026, ANTITHESES took part in two public engagement events as part of the ‘Let’s Talk About’ series, — first in Swindon’s Festival of Tomorrow, and later at the History of Science Museum in Oxford. This event was the second 'Let's Talk About' event, focussing on surveillance, created by the Pandemic Sciences Institute and organised in association with the History of Science Museum. We discussed questions like ‘How do you identify emerging pandemic threats?’ and ‘How should we navigate everyday data — from social media to wearable devices — being used in public health?’.

The events brought together researchers, ethicists, and members of the public to discuss surveillance, public health, and pandemic preparedness. While both events explored similar themes, the conversations in each location highlighted different public concerns and perspectives.

Trust, communication, and public engagement 

 Across both events, one theme appeared repeatedly: trust. 

Participants were interested not only in how surveillance works, but also in how data is used, who benefits from it, and whether the public is kept informed. Discussions often returned to experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic, including confusion around government messaging and concerns about transparency. 

Researchers also reflected on the challenges of public engagement. One important point raised was that people may contribute data or samples to research but never hear about the outcomes. Participants highlighted the importance of feedback, accessible communication, and making people feel involved rather than simply studied.

The discussions particularly emphasised the emotional side of public health decision-making. Conversations explored how feelings such as fear, uncertainty, and fatigue can shape public responses more strongly than scientific facts alone. 

As one researcher reflected: “In policy, we rarely address emotions.” 

Shared Themes, Different Perspectives 

 Although the themes overlapped, the two events developed slightly different foci. 

The Swindon event generated strong discussion around transparency, data sharing, inequalities, and trust in institutions. Participants questioned how predictive models are used in decision-making and raised concerns about funding, private interests, and public accountability. 

There was also significant interest in how surveillance research connects to everyday life, including questions about whether behavioural data could be included in modelling and how regional inequalities affect virus trends. 

The Oxford event focused more heavily on ethics, public values, emotions, and language. Participants discussed tensions between individual freedoms and public good, particularly in relation to quarantine and outbreak response. 

The language of “surveillance” itself also became a topic of conversation. Some participants associated the term with being watched or controlled, leading to suggestions such as “monitoring”, “prevention”, or “protection” as alternative framings. 

At the same time, attendees responded positively to clear and accessible explanations of scientific concepts. One participant even suggested creating a school-age book about genome sequencing.

Key learnings 

Taken together, the events highlighted several important lessons for public engagement around surveillance and public health: 

• Public trust depends on transparency and communication. 
• Emotions and lived experiences shape public responses as much as evidence does. 
• People want meaningful dialogue, not one-way communication. 
• Language matters when discussing surveillance and public health. 
• Public engagement must include communities who may not usually participate in research conversations. 

Both events also showed a strong appetite for open discussion about science, ethics, and pandemic preparedness. The feedback from Swindon and Oxford was overwhelmingly positive, with attendees valuing the opportunity to speak directly with researchers, ask difficult questions, and reflect together on how society should respond to future public health challenges. 

As one participant observed: “If things meant to keep pandemics away work, you would not notice it.”

Photo courtesy: 1) Monika, Oxford Atelier Photography 2) Tiger Watts Stills.