Biofantasies: genetics and medicine in the print news media

JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 2002

New Genetics and Society, 2006

This paper is concerned with representations of the human genome and medical applications of modern biotechnology in Finnish television news. The main focus is on the way that news stories are framed by various linguistic and visual means and on how scientists appearing in the news are positioned. The qualitative analysis shows that in the national frame, biotechnology was treated as a field with great future promise, weighing the prospects of Finnish scientists to succeed in international competition. In the disease frame, the focus was on the achievements of genetic research in the treatment of serious diseases. In the breakthrough frame, it was predicted that genetics will revolutionise the treatment of diseases in ‘the near future’. Finally, news stories presented in the threat frame were mainly concerned to predict and avert problems arising from the potential abuse of genetic research. The analysis suggests that these frames implied certain speaking positions to the scientists appearing in the news stories.

… Medical Association Journal, 2004

he public gets most of its information about genetics from television, radio, magazines and newspapers. 1-4 It has been suggested that media representations of genetics are inaccurate or exaggerated and lead to a phenomenon that has been called "genohype," 5-7 the "hyped" portrayal of both the benefits and risks associated with genetic research and the application of genetic technologies. It has also been suggested that this sensationalization of genetics may have an adverse impact on the public's ability to participate in policy discussions 1,8 and on the utilization of genetic services because it creates inflated perceptions of the value of, for example, specific genetic tests. 5,9 Several studies and commentaries have suggested various degrees and sources of reporting inaccuracies. For example, institutional press releases may be incomplete (with risks and limits being underplayed), 10 media stories about medications often include inadequate or incomplete information about risks and costs, 11 and abstracts from scientific meetings often receive a significant amount of media attention even though the validity and importance of the research has not "been established in the scientific community." 12 Some have speculated about the general weaknesses of the popular media's coverage of medical breakthroughs 13,14 and their preference for positive over negative results. 15 Surprisingly few systematic studies have examined the accuracy of media reporting in the context of genetics, most focusing on coverage of a single issue, such as sexual orientation 16,17 or the discovery of susceptibility to breast and prostate cancer. 18,19 The available data are instructive but not definitive. 14,16-20

Sociology of Health and Illness

Encyclopedia of Life Sciences (ELS), 2009

Today, public debate over genetic futures takes place within a new societal context. There is a greater emphasis from policymakers on promoting engagement between sciences and publics, and mass media play a key role in this shifting relationship. Media representations of genetic futures are often subject to both positive and negative hype. This tendency towards ‘genohype’ results from the economic imperative of journalistic and entertainment media production. Moreover, symbolic representations from science fiction continue to influence mainstream news coverage of genetics, present and future. The ways in which media representations of genetic futures influence audiences are only partially known; however, it is clear that there is a complex negotiation between existing attitudes, knowledge and values and the messages communicated about genetic futures by both factual and fictional media.

Health Communication, 2017

A growing body of research has given attention to issues surrounding genetic testing, including expanded carrier screening (ECS), an elective medical test that allows planning or expecting parents to consider the potential occurrence of genetic diseases and disorders in their children. These studies have noted the role of the mass media in driving public perceptions about such testing, giving particular attention to ways in which coverage of genetics and genetic testing broadly may drive public attitudes and choices concerning the morality, legality, ethics, and parental well-being involved in genetic technologies. However, few studies have explored how mass media are covering the newer test, ECS. Drawing on health-related framing studies that have shown in varying degrees the impact particular frames such as gain/loss and thematic/episodic can have on the public, this study examines the frame selection employed by online media in its coverage of ECS. This analysis—combined with an analysis of the sources and topics used in such coverage and how they relate to selected frames—helps to clarify how mass media are covering an increasingly important medical test and offers considerations of how such coverage may inform mass media scholarship as well as health-related practices.

Science Communication, 2003

Objective: To develop an instrument to assess the content and balance of media stories about genetic discoveries relevant to human diseases and assess its ability to detect variability. Methods: Consumer focus groups to help develop the instrument, and surveys of scientists and journalists to evaluate the items. Ratings by at least two readers assessed reliability. Variability was measured by comparing scores of 47 stories emanating from two discoveries. Results: Reader agreement on content items was good (kappa = 0.74). Consumers, scientists, and journalists were in substantial agreement about what content items should be included. Some items deemed essential by journalists appeared in very few stories. One-third of stories exaggerated the benefits of the discovery and one-third presented a balanced selection of expert opinion. Coverage of specific items varied from 11.5 percent to 84.6 percent. Conclusions: The instrument is reliable; contains items deemed important by consumers, ...

Science Communication, 2003

Objective: To develop an instrument to assess the content and balance of media stories about genetic discoveries relevant to human diseases and assess its ability to detect variability. Methods: Consumer focus groups to help develop the instrument, and surveys of scientists and journalists to evaluate the items. Ratings by at least two readers assessed reliability. Variability was measured by comparing scores of 47 stories emanating from two discoveries. Results: Reader agreement on content items was good (kappa = 0.74). Consumers, scientists, and journalists were in substantial agreement about what content items should be included. Some items deemed essential by journalists appeared in very few stories. One-third of stories exaggerated the benefits of the discovery and one-third presented a balanced selection of expert opinion. Coverage of specific items varied from 11.5 percent to 84.6 percent. Conclusions: The instrument is reliable; contains items deemed important by consumers, scientists, and journalists; and detects variability.

European Journal of Cultural Studies, 2017

Media analysis of public engagement with genetics and cloning is dominated by media genre-specific or issue-specific analysis. Such analyses tend to frame genetics as a new technology, and media resources as current and immediate. Broader public discourses tend towards marginalising public knowledge as against expert voices. This article takes a broader perspective to demonstrate that people engage with multiple media genres over an extensive time frame. It explores the findings of Mass Observation directive looking at how people know about genes, genetics and cloning. We detail the specificity of using this research instrument and map the rich and detailed media culture, which emerged. Thus, we provide insight into how media cultures resource public knowledge-making over time. The research also indicates a pro-science and engaged public culture in relation to genetics in the United Kingdom, in which the media are key.

New Genetics, New Identities