Public movements such as Scientists4Future, which often rally behind a monolithic and definite idea of scientific knowledge, have been criticised for promoting scientocratic political premises (e.g., Bogner in Die Epistemisierung des Politischen: Wie die Macht des Wissens die Demokratie gefährdet. Reclam, 2021). Appeals to “follow the science” assume both a political necessity to adhere to unambiguous, consistent scientific facts and a general scientific voice speaking a kind of truth merged from every scientific field. This chapter argues that, while at least in Germany a lot of political attention has lately been given to the democratic value of science communication (SPD in Mehr Fortschritt wagen: Bündnis für Freiheit, Gerechtigkeit und Nachhaltigkeit, 2021), and funding has been on the rise for years, the promoted ideal of science communication lacks sensitivity regarding the diverse and multifaceted nature of specialised research cultures and institutions. To provide their discipline with an honest trust base in public, researchers and communicators first need to reflect on their work and the environment they operate in. Drawing from a process of field-specific self-reflection could help to design individual communication strategiescommunication strategies that increase scientific trust by targeting the dimensions of “expertise”, “integrity”, and “benevolence” (Hendriks et al. in PLoS ONE 10, 2015) from a discipline-specific starting point. Science studies and the social sciences, in general, are destined to act as an integrative force in this process.