This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Dearing, J. W. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Newspaper coverage of maverick science: creating controversy through balancing

Department of Communication at Michigan State University, East Lansing MI 48824-1212 USA

How do journalists portray the ideas of maverick scientists to the general public? Are mavericks portrayed as credible scientific sources? Do the stories written by journalists function to merely translate maverick theories for nonscientific audiences, or do they more often transform those maverick theories into the realm of scientific controversies? This study hypothesized answers to these questions by analysing how journalists wrote about three maverick theories: (1) a 1990 earthquake prediction, (2) an alternative theory about the cause of AIDS, and (3) cold fusion. A content analysis of 393 news articles in 26 US newspapers and a mailed survey of the journalists who wrote those stories suggest that scientific theories which are believed to be credible by a minority of scientists may be lent credibility in mass media stories, even though the journalists themselves thought that the maverick scientists lacked credibility. Implications for the communication of risk through the mass media are discussed.

Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 4, No. 4, 341-361 (1995)
DOI: 10.1088/0963-6625/4/4/002


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. E. Clarke A Question of Balance: The Autism-Vaccine Controversy in the British and American Elite Press Science Communication, September 1, 2008; 30(1): 77 - 107. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Dingwall and M. Aldridge Television wildlife programming as a source of popular scientific information: a case study of evolution Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2006; 15(2): 131 - 152. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Ungar and D. Bray Silencing science: partisanship and the career of a publication disputing the dangers of secondhand smoke Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 2005; 14(1): 5 - 23. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. B. Corbett and J. L. Durfee Testing Public (Un)Certainty of Science: Media Representations of Global Warming Science Communication, December 1, 2004; 26(2): 129 - 151. [Abstract] [PDF]

				F. Mellor Between Fact and Fiction: Demarcating Science from Non-Science in Popular Physics Books Social Studies of Science, August 1, 2003; 33(4): 509 - 538. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Bucchi and R. G. Mazzolini Big science, little news: science coverage in the Italian daily press, 1946-1997 Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 2003; 12(1): 7 - 24. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. F. WEIGOLD Communicating Science: A Review of the Literature Science Communication, December 1, 2001; 23(2): 164 - 193. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. C. Zehr Public representations of scientific uncertainty about global climate change Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2000; 9(2): 85 - 103. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. Dutt and K. C. Garg An overview of science and technology coverage in Indian English-language dailies Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2000; 9(2): 123 - 140. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. Edmond and D. Mercer Creating (public) science in the Noah's Ark case Public Understanding of Science, October 1, 1999; 8(4): 317 - 343. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Smith Reporters, news sources, and scientific intervention: the New Madrid earthquake prediction Public Understanding of Science, July 1, 1996; 5(3): 205 - 216. [Abstract] [PDF]