|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Newspaper coverage of maverick science: creating controversy through balancing
James W. Dearing
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:
|
|
|
|
 
J. Grimm
"Teach the Controversy": The Relationship Between Sources and Frames in Reporting the Intelligent Design Debate
Science Communication,
December 1, 2009;
31(2):
167 - 186.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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]
|
|
|
|
|
