Abstract
This contribution begins by describing the semi-chaos inside of daily or weekly journalism into which reporting on biotechnology must fit. Within this framework it is not intrinsically obvious that even the most profound technological change easily lends itself to anything like systematic news coverage. A model to keep in mind is imagining how nineteenth century journalists would have floundered trying to report on the emergence of electricity. A citation analysis indicates that despite its significant social implications newspapers and magazines generally view biotechnology as a business story. A way around this economic focusing may be discussion groups and web sites on the Internet. Finally, it is not clear how influential the news media is in forming people’s opinions about biotechnology. It is suggested that fiction, and in particular movies and television, may have a greater impact on public consciousness than news organizations.
Stephen Strauss is science reporter at Globe and Mail. His address is 365 Sackville Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5V 3G5, Canada. E-mail: sstrauss@globeandmail.ca.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Altered food labeled dangerous (1996). Calgary Herald, November 19, p. B2.
Altering food called dangerous experiment (1996). Toronto Star, November 20, p. E1.
American Newspaper Publishers Association (1982). Facts about newspapers. Washington, D.C.: ANPA.
Burkett, W. (1986). News reporting: Science, medicine and high technology. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.
Commercial backing could impair academic influence (1996). Nature, December 13, p. 801.
Conference notes (1997). Globe and Mail, February 22, p. D6.
Conquest Research (1995). The 1995 national science literature survey. Prepared for the Royal Society of Canada. Ontario: Ontario Science Centre and Science Network Ontario.
Creative Research International (1996). Environmental applications of biotechnology: Focus groups. Ottawa: Office of Consumer Affairs, Industry Canada.
DeFleur, M., & Dennis, E. (1996). Understanding mass communication (5th ed.) Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Dennis, E., & Merrill, J. (1996). Media debates. White Plains, NY: Longman.
Dubas, O., & Martel, L. (1975). A research study on science communication. Vol. 2. Ottawa: Minister of State Science and Technology.
Dubois, L. (1996). Le discourse sur la santé à la television: differentes types de locateurs pour differentes types de representations. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 87(1), 56–61.
Einsiedel E., & Schiele, B. (forthcoming). Biotechnology, media coverage, public perceptions and public policy. A study for the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and the Canadian Institute of Biotechnology.
Ernst & Young (1996). The media and the internet. Toronto: Ernst & Young.
French ethics panel warns of crisis in science reporting (1995). Nature, July 13, p. 108.
Frewer, L., & Shepherd, R. (1994). Attributing information to different sources: Effects on the perceived qualities of information, on the perceived relevance of information, and on attitude formation. Public Understanding of Science, 3, 385–401.
Friedman, S. (1986). Scientists and journalists, reporting science as news. New York: Free Press.
Fulford, R. (1965). The built-in bias of the press. In: L. Lyons (Ed.), Reporting the news, pp. 153–159. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Genetic marvel spawns potential ethical nightmares (1997). New York Times, February 24, p. A1.
Gitlin, T. (1980). The whole world is watching. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Goodell, R. (1977). The visible scientist. Boston: Little Brown.
Greenpeace appeals to Nestle shareholders (1997). www.greenpeace.org/-comms/97/geneg/press/june05.html.
Hello Dolly, it’s so easy to see you (1997). Globe and Mail, March 1, p. A8.
John Fagan aligns with Mother Nature (1994). Fairfield Weekly Reader, December 8, p. 1.
Koshland, D., Jr. (1990). Two plus two equals five. Science, 247, 1381.
Milk’s raging hormone (1995). Globe and Mail, July 13, p. A13.
Nelkin, D. (1995). Selling science, how the press covers science and technology. New York: Freeman.
Pfund, N., & Hofstadter, L. (1991). Biomedical innovation and the press. Journal of Communication, 41(2), 138–153.
Plein, L. C. (1991). Popularizing biotechnology, the influence of issue definition. Science, Technology & Human Values, 14, 474–490.
Powell, D. (1996). Applying risk communication theory to the Canadian agri-food sector. Guelph: University of Guelph. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis.
Priest, S. H. (1994). Structuring public debate on biotechnology. Science Communication, 16, 166–179.
Priest, S. H. (1995). Information equity, public understanding of science, and the biotechnology debate. Journal of Communication, 45(1), 39–54.
Schopenhauer, A. (1970). Essays and aphorisms, selected and translated by R. J. Hillindate. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Scientists fear humans used as guinea pigs (1996). Globe and Mail, November 15, p. A8.
Send in the clones: Hollywood sees Dolly potential (1997). Vancouver Sun, March 1, p. D7.
Sheep cloning opens ethics debate (1997). Vancouver Sun, February 24, p. A1.
Singer E., & Endreny, P. (1993). Reporting on risk — How the mass media portrays accidents, diseases, disasters, and other hazards. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Thompson, L. (1992). Genes and human self-knowledge. Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa Press.
Tuchman, G. (1978). Making news. New York: Free Press.
Underwood, D. (1993). When MBAs rule the newsroom. New York: Columbia University Press.
University of Guelph (1997). Listservs look at global food safety and agricultural risks. Press release, April 3 (listserv@listserv.uoguelph.ca).
Wilkie, T. (1996). Sources in science: Who can we trust. Lancet, 347, 1308–1311.
Wilkins, A. (1993). Jurassic Park and the “Gay Gene”: The new genetics seen as through the distorting lens of the media. FASEB Journal, 7, 1203–1204.
Willis, J. (1996). Journalism, state of the art. New York: Praeger.
With cloning of a sheep, the ethical grounds shift (1997). New York Times, February 24, p. A1.
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1998 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Strauss, S. (1998). Biotechnology and the Media. In: Knoppers, B.M., Mathios, A.D. (eds) Biotechnology and the Consumer. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5311-3_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5311-3_10
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-7923-5541-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-5311-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive