Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Science Communication
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 PRIEST, S. H.
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?

Structuring Public Debate on Biotechnology

Media Frames and Public Response

SUSANNA HORNIG PRIEST

Texas A&M University

A study of themes arising within focus group discussions of U.S. lay publics (both student and nonstudent adults) in response to newspaper coverage of biotechnology is consistent with the assertion that media frames and reader schemas interact to produce an understanding of a newly emerging issue. Newspaper coverage heavily dominated by institutional sources and dealing with only a narrow range of issues may be limiting the terms of public debate in an unhealthy way. Readers reason by analogy with related and sometimes unrelated developments in trying to understand biotechnology, based on schemas reflecting their general understanding of science.

Science Communication, Vol. 16, No. 2, 166-179 (1994)
DOI: 10.1177/0164025994016002004
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
 Public Understanding of ScienceHome page
A. Petersen, A. Anderson, S. Allan, and C. Wilkinson
Opening the black box: scientists' views on the role of the news media in the nanotechnology debate
Public Understanding of Science, September 1, 2009; 18(5): 512 - 530.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Science CommunicationHome page
M. Alcibar
Human Cloning and the Raelians: Media Coverage and the Rhetoric of Science
Science Communication, December 1, 2008; 30(2): 236 - 265.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Science CommunicationHome page
A. Anderson and A. Marhadour
Slick PR? The Media Politics of the Prestige Oil Spill
Science Communication, September 1, 2007; 29(1): 96 - 115.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Science CommunicationHome page
J. C. Besley and J. Shanahan
Media Attention and Exposure in Relation to Support for Agricultural Biotechnology
Science Communication, June 1, 2005; 26(4): 347 - 367.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Public Understanding of ScienceHome page
M. Kohring and J. Matthes
The face(t)s of biotech in the nineties: how the German press framed modern biotechnology
Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2002; 11(2): 143 - 154.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Science Technology Human ValuesHome page
I. Barns, R. Schibeci, A. Davison, and R. Shaw
"What Do You Think about Genetic Medicine?" Facilitating Sociable Public Discourse on Developments in the New Genetics
Science Technology Human Values, July 1, 2000; 25(3): 283 - 308.
[Abstract] [PDF]