<p>The conduct and translation of scientific research is shaped by academic and journalistic publishing. Academic journals issue editorial guidelines and policies that inform how researchers shape and present their studies. Journalists select and report on academic studies for public audiences. Despite the potential importance of journal editors and journalists in the scientific process, little has been done to examine how these groups think about their roles and responsibilities–especially when it comes to ethically sensitive scientific domains like social and behavioral genomics (SBG): the study of whether and how genetic differences between individuals correlate with differences in behaviors such as aggression and outcomes such as educational attainment. To begin filling this gap, we conducted semi-structured interviews with editors working at academic journals that publish SBG research (<i>n</i> = 10) and journalists who have reported on SBG studies (<i>n</i> = 13). Journal editors largely saw themselves as mediators between authors and peer reviewers who help to shepherd along research. Journalists frequently described themselves as translators of science for wide audiences; at times they also saw themselves as interrogators of science. While both groups considered SBG especially ethically sensitive and prone to risks such as misinterpretation, many expressed that systematic ethical review processes and guidelines for SBG are lacking. Further, many deferred the ethical responsibility to minimize risks associated with SBG to others. Our findings highlight the need for more explicit frameworks in academic and journalistic publishing to support the ethically responsible conduct and communication of SBG.</p>