News Narratives about Nano S&T in Major U.S. and Non-U.S. Newspapers

The author of this content analytic study examines news narratives about nano science and technology (nano S&T) in major U.S. and non-U.S. newspapers by taking a random sample of 350 articles published from1988 through mid-July 2004 froma universe of 1,330 articles. In addition to identifying dominant frames or content themes, the author evaluates whether there is a dominant tone or sentiment regarding the ethical, legal, and societal implications of developments and issues in nano S&T. Scientific discoveries or projects and the social effects of nano S&T are the dominant frames. The ratio of articles leaning toward the sentiment that benefits outweigh risks versus that risks outweigh benefits is three to one.

[1]  K. Tomaselli,et al.  The poverty of journalism: Media studies and ‘science’ , 1999 .

[2]  K. Parsi,et al.  The Bioethicist as Public Intellectual , 2004, The American journal of bioethics : AJOB.

[3]  Angus I. Kingon,et al.  Nanoscience and Technology: Firms Take First Steps , 2005 .

[4]  C. Dornan,et al.  Some problems in conceptualizing the issue of “science and the media” , 1990 .

[5]  Linda Frances Vennard Goldenberg,et al.  Dwarfing the Social? Nanotechnology Lessons from the Biotechnology Front , 2004 .

[6]  S. Locke.  Charisma and the Iron Cage: Rationalization, Science and Scientology , 2004 .

[7]  Bruce V. Lewenstein,et al.  Biotechnology and the American Media , 2002 .

[8]  W. Wagner,et al.  Collective symbolic coping with new technology: Knowledge, images and public discourse. , 2002, The British journal of social psychology.

[9]  M. Meister.  Meteorology and the rhetoric of nature's cultural display , 2001 .

[10]  G. Gaskell,et al.  GM Foods and the Misperception of Risk Perception , 2004, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[11]  Michael D. Cobb,et al.  Public perceptions about nanotechnology: Risks, benefits and trust , 2004, Emerging Technologies: Ethics, Law and Governance.

[12]  M. Michael,et al.  Teaching biotechnology: identity in the context of ignorance and knowledgeability , 1997 .

[13]  Jonathan Jackson,et al.  Imagining nanotechnology: cultural support for technological innovation in Europe and the United States , 2005 .

[14]  Julie L. Andsager,et al.  Evaluating the public information: Shaping news coverage of the silicone implant controversy , 1998 .

[15]  Massimiano Bucchi,et al.  Big science, little news: science coverage in the Italian daily press, 1946-1997 , 2003 .

[16]  S. Allender-Hagedorn,et al.  Issues in agricultural and environmental biotechnology: identifying and comparing biotechnology issues from public opinion surveys, the popular press and technical/regulatory sources , 1997 .

[17]  C. Adley,et al.  Irish public perceptions and attitudes to modern biotechnology: an overview with a focus on GM foods. , 2001, Trends in biotechnology.

[18]  Dominique Brossard,et al.  Framing Science , 2003 .

[19]  M. Levitt.  Public Consultation in Bioethics. What's the Point of Asking the Public When They Have Neither Scientific nor Ethical Expertise? , 2003, Health Care Analysis.

[20]  A. Smart.  Reporting the dawn of the post-genomic era: who wants to live forever? , 2003, Sociology of health & illness.

[21]  Bruce V. Lewenstein,et al.  Knowledge, Reservations, or Promise? , 2002, Commun. Res..

[22]  Susanna Hornig Priest,et al.  The “Trust Gap” Hypothesis: Predicting Support for Biotechnology Across National Cultures as a Function of Trust in Actors , 2003, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[23]  L. Bero,et al.  Framing Processes in Public Commentary on US Federal Tobacco Control Regulation , 2003, Social studies of science.

[24]  Terrence A. Maxwell,et al.  The public need to know: emergencies, government organizations, and public information policies , 2003, Gov. Inf. Q..

[25]  Charles R. Simpson.  Nature as news: Science reporting in theNew York times 1898 to 1983 , 1987 .

[26]  A. Wolfe,et al.  A Framework for Analyzing Dialogues over the Acceptability of Controversial Technologies , 2002 .

[27]  J. Schummer.  Reading nano: the public interest in nanotechnology as reflected in purchase patterns of books , 2005 .