This Article Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF) All Versions of this Article: 1075547008320262v1 30/1/77    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted 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 Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Clarke, C. E. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

A Question of Balance: The Autism-Vaccine Controversy in the British and American Elite Press

Cornell University

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: cec54{at}cornell.edu.

	Abstract

Although balance is a well-known and arguably important journalistic norm, how should journalists adhere to this norm when the bulk of scientific evidence clearly favors one (presumably accurate) perspective? Should balance be defined in terms of the quantity of information or the quality of viewpoints presented? Using British and American newspaper coverage of the autism-vaccine controversy as a case study, this article explores whether balanced reporting on scientific claims produced a discourse at odds with the scientific consensus that there was no autism-vaccine link. Implications for journalism ethics and risk communication are discussed.

First published on June 24, 2008, doi:10.1177/1075547008320262

Science Communication 2008;30:77.

A more recent version of this article appeared on September 1, 2008


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