Including Limitations in News Coverage of Cancer Research: Effects of News Hedging on Fatalism, Medical Skepticism, Patient Trust, and Backlash

We compared local TV news with national TV news in terms of cancer coverage using a nationally representative sample of local nightly TV and national network TV (i.e., ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN) cancer news stories that aired during 2002 and 2003. Compared to national TV news, local TV cancer stories were (a) much shorter in length, (b) less likely to report on cancer prevention (i.e., preventive behaviors and screening tests), and (c) less likely to reference national organizations (i.e., NCI, ACS, NIH, CDC, FDA) that have made clear recommendations about ways to prevent cancer. The implications of these findings for health communication research and cancer education were discussed.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparing Local TV News with National TV News in Cancer Coverage: An Exploratory Content Analysis

Lee

Long

Slater

et al. 2014

“…Hedging and two-sided information are important when covering health findings, but they also may trigger uncertainty and disorientation. Jensen and colleagues consistently have explored audience responses to health news that features hedging (Jensen, 2008;Jensen et al, 2011), but it is not clear how people respond to two-sided conflicting news. The current article has investigated this question by proposing a moderated mediation model to explore audience responses to such coverage.…”

Section: Findings and Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Men's and Women's Responses to Two-Sided Health News Coverage: A Moderated Mediation Model

Chang

2013

This study explores how audiences respond to news coverage of food and nutrition topics when that coverage provides either 2-sided (positive and negative) information or 1-sided, unanimously positive information. A moderated mediation model helps clarify the different impacts of 2- and 1-sided news coverage and the psychological processes they elicit. Specifically, gender moderates the relative effects of 1- and 2-sided news stories; ambivalent feelings play a mediating role in the process. The findings confirm the model predictions: When reading 2-sided as opposed to 1-sided news, men experience more ambivalent feelings, less favorable attitudes toward the health issues, and lower intentions to adopt the advocated behaviors, whereas women do not exhibit such differences. Moreover, the ambivalent feelings mediate the interaction between gender and news presentation (i.e., 1- or 2-sided) on attitudes toward health issues and behavioral intentions to adopt advocated health behaviors.

“…These fatalistic beliefs might result from media coverage, through their tone and focus (Jensen et al, 2011; McClure, Allen, & Walkey, 2001; Niederdeppe, Fowler, Goldstein, & Pribble, 2010). Rather than discussing all aspects of the disease—including risk factors, prevention, treatment, and outcomes—a focus in simplified news stories mainly on the causes of cancer makes these causes more salient to the determinant of other important factors about cancer, namely prevention (Slater, Hayes, Reineke, Long, & Bettinghaus, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reduced Fatalism and Increased Prevention Behavior After Two High-Profile Lung Cancer Events

Portnoy

Kaufman

Moser

et al. 2013

The positive impact of media coverage of high-profile cancer events on cancer prevention behaviors is well-established. However, less work has focused on potential adverse psychological reactions to such events, such as fatalism. Conducting 3 studies, the authors explored how the lung cancer death of Peter Jennings and diagnosis of Dana Reeve in 2005 related to fatalism. Analysis of a national media sample in Study 1 found that media coverage of these events often focused on reiterating the typical profile of those diagnosed with lung cancer; 38% of the media mentioned at least 1 known risk factor for lung cancer, most often smoking. Data from a nationally representative survey in Study 2 found that respondents reported lower lung cancer fatalism, after, compared with before, the events (OR = 0.16, 95% CI [0.03, 0.93]). A sustained increase in call volume to the national tobacco Quitline after these events was found in Study 3. These results suggest that there is a temporal association between high-profile cancer events, the subsequent media coverage, psychological outcomes, and cancer prevention behaviors. These results suggest that high-profile cancer events could be leveraged as an opportunity for large-scale public heath communication campaigns through the dissemination of cancer prevention messages and services.