There is a kind of radical trust that is characterised by being absolutely opposed to knowledge: once people know they are trusting, they are no longer trusting because to radically trust implies having no knowledge, forcing people to trust in the unknown. This conceptualisation of trust seems to be neglected in science communication studies. Trusting a scientist stems from knowing, even if only vaguely, what they are and what they do. Science communication is not, thus, a case of blind trust, a trust without some kind of knowledge. However, it is possible to conclude that there are two moments where radical trust is at play in science communication: when the scientific matter at hand is too complex, and when laypeople’s socioeconomic disadvantages force them to trust. The problem is that these two seem difficult to separate from one another. Given the effects of socioeconomic inequalities in knowledge acquisition and communication, which means that while some people trust radically out of choice, others are forced to do so because they have no choice, one proposed solution is a more careful accountability of the economic conditions and the effects of science production and communication on disadvantaged laypeople.