No abstract

The amount of United States network coverage of the 1986 nuclear mishap of the Soviet Union suggests some sensationalism in coverage, with much use of such words as “radiation” and “meltdown.” Yet pictures and still graphics were mostly innocuous and “radiation” was seldom used in fear-inducing linkages. Alarming statements — while there — were in the minority.

This study attempted to uncover whether enough background information about nuclear power and the nuclear industries in the USA, USSR and Eastern and Western Europe had been included during the first two weeks of US coverage of the Chernobyl accident so that Americans would not be misled in their understanding of and attitudes toward nuclear power in general. It also sought to determine if reporters took advantage of the Chernobyl accident to attack nuclear technology or the nuclear industry in general. Coverage was analysed in five US newspapers and on the evening newscasts of the three major US television networks. Despite heavy coverage of the accident, no more than 25% of the coverage was devoted to information on safety records, history of accidents and current status of nuclear industries. Not enough information was provided to help the public's level of understanding of nuclear power or to put the Chernobyl accident in context. However, articles and newscasts generally balanced use of pro- and anti-nuclear statements, and did not include excessive amounts of fear-inducing and negative information.