Biotechnology and the popular press: hype and the selling of science.

The popular media has emerged as an important source of scientific information. It has been suggested that the portrayal of genetics by the media is often inaccurate--a phenomenon branded 'genohype'--and, as a result, is having an adverse impact on public understanding and policy development. However, emerging data suggest that, in some circumstances, the media reporting of science is surprisingly accurate and portrays a message created by the scientific community. As such, there are reasons to believe that the hyping of research results might be part of a more systemic problem associated with the increasingly commercial nature of the research environment.

[1]  T. Caulfield.  Underwhelmed: hyperbole, regulatory policy, and the genetic revolution. , 2000, McGill law journal. Revue de droit de McGill.

[2]  U. Fleising,et al.  In search of genohype: A content analysis of biotechnology company documents , 2001 .

[3]  P. Conrad,et al.  Constructing the ‘Gay Gene’ in the News: Optimism and Skepticism in the US and British Press , 2001 .

[4]  R. Kravitz,et al.  Medical researchers and the media. Attitudes toward public dissemination of research. , 1992, JAMA.

[5]  R. Steinbrook.  Medical journals and medical reporting. , 2000, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  B. Williams-Jones,et al.  Rhetoric and Hype , 2003, American journal of pharmacogenomics : genomics-related research in drug development and clinical practice.

[7]  G Koren,et al.  Bias against negative studies in newspaper reports of medical research. , 1991, JAMA.

[8]  Joel Lexchin,et al.  Drugs in the news: an analysis of Canadian newspaper coverage of new prescription drugs. , 2003, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[9]  M Shuchman,et al.  Medical Scientists and Health News Reporting: A Case of Miscommunication , 1997, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[10]  D. Ransohoff,et al.  Sensationalism in the media: when scientists and journalists may be complicit collaborators. , 2001, Effective clinical practice : ECP.

[11]  Gail Geller,et al.  Mapping the human genome: An assessment of media coverage and public reaction , 2002, Genetics in Medicine.

[12]  C. Condit.  What is 'public opinion' about genetics? , 2001, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[13]  R. Kravitz,et al.  Influence of direct to consumer pharmaceutical advertising and patients' requests on prescribing decisions: two site cross sectional survey , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[14]  D. A. Hay.  Who should fund and control the direction of human behavior genetics? Review of Nuffield Council on Bioethics 2002 Report, Genetics and Human Behaviour: the Ethical Context , 2003, Genes, brain, and behavior.

[15]  J. Benkendorf,et al.  Patients' attitudes about autonomy and confidentiality in genetic testing for breast-ovarian cancer susceptibility. , 1997, American journal of medical genetics.

[16]  T. Bubela,et al.  Do the print media “hype” genetic research? A comparison of newspaper stories and peer-reviewed research papers , 2004, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[17]  S B Soumerai,et al.  Coverage by the news media of the benefits and risks of medications. , 2000, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  Piet Schenelaars,et al.  Public opinion , 2013, BDJ.

[19]  T. Harrisson.  WHAT IS PUBLIC OPINION , 1940 .

[20]  C. Deangelis.  Conflict of interest and the public trust. , 2000, JAMA.

[21]  Gail Geller,et al.  Assessing Mass Media Reporting of Disease-Related Genetic Discoveries , 2003 .