Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Public Understanding of Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Saari, M.-A.
Right arrow Articles by Osler, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Endangered species: science writers in the Canadian daily press

Mary-Anne Saari

CHUM/CityTV's Windsor, Ontario television station CHWI

Candace Gibson

department of pathology of the faculty of medicine at the University of Western Ontario

Andrew Osler

University of Western Ontario's school of journalism

The last comprehensive study of Canadian science journalists and science reporting was done over 20 years ago (Dubas and Martel 1973). A more recent content analysis of seven major Canadian dailies found most science stories are "hard" news in style and originate from wire sources (Einsiedel 1992).

This 1994 survey of 105 of Canada's daily English-language newspapers and their commitment to science journalism revealed a general weakening and dilution of reporter allocation. Over 50 percent of Canadian dailies did not allocate a science reporter. Only 18 full-time science reporters were identified. A follow-up of 45 journalists covering science at least half-time revealed most covered science policy. The vast majority had no science training. Time problems and competing demands hindered professional development.

Confirming suggestions of previous literature, this study also indicates the Canadian daily newspaper structure is not supportive of the style of reportage required for quality science writing, nor of the development of such writers.

Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 7, No. 1, 61-81 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/096366259800700105
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Science CommunicationHome page
R. A. LOGAN, P. ZENGJUN, and N. F. WILSON
Science and Medical Coverage in the Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post: A Six-Year Perspective
Science Communication, September 1, 2000; 22(1): 5 - 26.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Public Understanding of ScienceHome page
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]