Comparing Cross-National Coverage of Genetically Modified Organisms: A Community Structure Approach

Abstract

A community structure analysis compared cross-national coverage of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) with variations in national-level demographics from 19 newspapers worldwide, yielding combined article “prominence” and “direction” “Media Vector” newspaper scores emphasizing either “favorable” (42%) or “unfavorable” (58%) coverage of GMOs. Regression analysis revealed “poverty level” (24.2% of variance) and “percent of agricultural land” (4.7%) totaled 28.9% of the variance, confirming that “vulnerability” indicators are associated with favorable media coverage of GMOs. Contrary to conventional “guard dog” assumptions that media mirror elite interests, systematic research on demographics and GMO coverage reveals that media can mirror the interests of society’s most “vulnerable.”

Strangers ante portas: The framing of refugees and migrants in the Czech quality press

“…The codebook included: (a) specific frame elements: problem definition, causal attribution, moral evaluation and treatment recommendation; the frame elements as well as the corresponding variables (all coded as binary ‘dummy’ variables) are described in the Supplemental Appendix and (b) variables related to editorial choices, more precisely the dominant location of the news stories (national or international) and issue prominence: the placement of article (page number), its length (number of columns) and presence of an accompanying photograph (these indicators of prominence were used, e.g. by Granner et al., 2010; McCombs, 2005; Pollock et al., 2017).…”

To Eat or Not to Eat: Framing of GMOs in American Media and Its Effects on Attitudes and Behaviors

“…On the other hand, in Northern California, more oppositional messages dealing with potential health and environmental concerns tended to resonate better with more liberal audiences (Crawley, 2007). Additionally, in a study of 20 major American newspapers from 2000 to 2004, Pollock (2010) found that favorable coverage of GMOs has been linked with increased poverty level in the United States. Taking that research agenda to the international level, Pollock et al (2017) confirmed that, using the sample of 19 publications around the world, vulnerability indicators, such as poverty level, have been associated with favorable media coverage of GMOs.…”

“…Additionally, in a study of 20 major American newspapers from 2000 to 2004, Pollock (2010) found that favorable coverage of GMOs has been linked with increased poverty level in the United States. Taking that research agenda to the international level, Pollock et al (2017) confirmed that, using the sample of 19 publications around the world, vulnerability indicators, such as poverty level, have been associated with favorable media coverage of GMOs. Consistent with the optimistic message that GMOs may be able to provide higher crop yields in order to feed more people in developing nations, Pollock et al found that “the higher the poverty level of a nation, the more favorable the coverage toward GMO usage” (2017, p. 587).…”

“…So far, research on framing of biotechnology and GMOs has mainly focused on identifying dominant type of news coverage in American and international media (e.g., Crawley, 2007; Marks et al, 2002; Nisbet & Lewenstein, 2002; Pollock et al, 2017; Ten Eyck et al, 2001) or people’s attitudes and perceptions of risk regarding GMOs (e.g., Viella-Vila & Costa-Font, 2008). However, content exploration studies and attitudes examination studies have been done either in separate research endeavors or combined in one (e.g., Viella-Vila & Costa-Font, 2008) but still conducted using different measures of key constructs under study.…”

One issue, different stories: The construction of GMO issues on Chinese, American and British mainstream media portals

“…However, the public rarely has direct access to GMO-related studies or scientists in this discipline (Scheufele, 2007); besides, without relevant professional training, it is almost impossible to process such sophisticated scientific information. Thus, the media, especially the legacy media, play an essential role in the transmission and interpretation of GMO-related knowledge and information (Listerman, 2010;McCluskey et al, 2016), affecting the public's opinions and attitudes towards GMOs (Clark and Illman, 2006) as well as the policymaking process concerning biotechnology (Lundy and Irani, 2004;Maeseele and Schuurman, 2008;Pollock et al, 2017). Media may influence people's understanding and perception of scientific issues through agenda setting and framing (Lundy and Irani, 2004;Meraz, 2009).…”