This paper examines the communication strategies of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) during the COVID-19 pandemic, analyzing their meeting minutes to assess transparency, expertise plurality, the science-policy boundary, and the communication of uncertainty and consensus. The study uses both metadata and linguistic analysis of the first 89 SAGE meeting minutes (January 22, 2020 – May 13, 2021). Findings indicate increased transparency over time, but also reveal a core group of experts dominating discussions. Linguistic analysis shows an increase in markers of both certainty and uncertainty, reflecting a commitment to precise communication, including ambiguities. However, self-references to SAGE decreased, potentially indicating a shift towards a more cautious approach or a greater emphasis on the separation of scientific advice from policy decisions. The study highlights the use of linguistic analysis in understanding science communication practices and the importance of transparency in science advisory processes.

Hannah Baker, Shauna Concannon, Matthias Meller, Katie Cohen, Alice Millington, Samuel Ward, Emily So