Mass-Mediated Expertise as Informal Policy Advice

Petersen, Imme; Heinrichs, Harald; Peters, Hans Peter

doi:10.1177/0162243909357914

Cited by 28 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The default assumption is that, if something passes the journalistic filter, it has to be relevant. Coverage by the media is widely perceived as an indicator of relevance and success, as in policy fields related to science (63). The assumption that media visibility helps to secure social support and public legitimacy-not only for science in general but also with respect to specific organizations or projects-is widely held by the management and public relations staff of science organizations as well as by scientists (51,52).…”

Section: Science Journalism and Response Of Scientific Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gap between science and media revisited: Scientists as public communicators

Peters

2013

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

271

261

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present article presents an up-to-date account of the current media relations of scientists, based on a comprehensive analysis of relevant surveys. The evidence suggests that most scientists consider visibility in the media important and responding to journalists a professional duty—an attitude that is reinforced by universities and other science organizations. Scientific communities continue to regulate media contacts with their members by certain norms that compete with the motivating and regulating influences of public information departments. Most scientists assume a two-arena model with a gap between the arenas of internal scientific and public communication. They want to meet the public in the public arena, not in the arena of internal scientific communication. Despite obvious changes in science and in the media system, the orientations of scientists toward the media, as well as the patterns of interaction with journalists, have their roots in the early 1980s. Although there is more influence on public communication from the science organizations and more emphasis on strategic considerations today, the available data do not indicate abrupt changes in communication practices or in the relevant beliefs and attitudes of scientists in the past 30 y. Changes in the science–media interface may be expected from the ongoing structural transformation of the public communication system. However, as yet, there is little evidence of an erosion of the dominant orientation toward the public and public communication within the younger generation of scientists.

show abstract

Section: Science Journalism and Response Of Scientific Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gap between science and media revisited: Scientists as public communicators

Peters

2013

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

271

261

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Petersen, Heinrichs, and Peters (2010) have argued that we can observe a phenomenon of "medialization," that is, there is "an institutionalization of attention to mass media coverage and an internalization of media criteria on all levels of the policy making process" (p. 865). Similarly, media coverage feeds back into research and frames researchers' ideas of how to represent science (Felt & Fochler, 2013).…”

Section: Media Communication Of Health Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic Narratives

Penkler

Felder

Felt

2015

Science Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explores how Austrian newspapers and magazines report on the obesity epidemic. We show how the media provide a space for formulating situated diagnostic narratives, that is, accounts that develop both a diagnosis of society through the lens of a health phenomenon and a definition of the phenomenon itself. Nourished by globally circulating discourses, these narratives are articulated in a national context and are enmeshed in biopolitical struggles. Linking a diagnosis of society to the biomedical sphere grants authority to diagnostic narratives and creates a space in which otherwise contestable moral calls to return to traditional orders can be articulated.

show abstract

“…The unit of analysis consisted of a single comment or post in a Facebook discussion. The coding was done inductively,such that general codes were defined by aggregating specific trends [41]. Inter-coder reliability on nearly 10 % of the sample of 2,289 items (200 items) collected from the group “Parents talk about Polio vaccination”, was satisfactory with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.75.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social media as a platform for health-related public debates and discussions: the Polio vaccine on Facebook

Orr

Baram‐Tsabari

Landsman

2016

Isr J Health Policy Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundSocial media can act as an important platform for debating, discussing, and disseminating information about vaccines. Our objectives were to map and describe the roles played by web-based mainstream media and social media as platforms for vaccination-related public debates and discussions during the Polio crisis in Israel in 2013: where and how did the public debate and discuss the issue, and how can these debates and discussions be characterized?MethodPolio-related coverage was collected from May 28 to October 31, 2013, from seven online Hebrew media platforms and the Facebook groups discussing the Polio vaccination were mapped and described. In addition, 2,289 items from the Facebook group “Parents talk about Polio vaccination” were analyzed for socio-demographic and thematic characteristics.ResultsThe traditional media mainly echoed formal voices from the Ministry of Health. The comments on the Facebook vaccination opposition groups could be divided into four groups: comments with individualistic perceptions, comments that expressed concerns about the safety of the OPV, comments that expressed distrust in the Ministry of Health, and comments denying Polio as a disease.In the Facebook group “Parents talk about the Polio vaccination”, an active group with various participants, 321 commentators submitted 2289 comments, with 64 % of the comments written by women. Most (92 %) people involved were parents. The comments were both personal (referring to specific situations) and general in nature (referring to symptoms or wide implications). A few (13 %) of the commentators were physicians (n = 44), who were responsible for 909 (40 %) of the items in the sample. Half the doctors and 6 % of the non-doctors wrote over 10 items each. This Facebook group formed a unique platform where unmediated debates and discussions between the public and medical experts took place.ConclusionThe comments on the social media, as well as the socio-demographic profiles of the commentators, suggest that social media is an active and versatile debate and discussion-facilitating platform in the context of vaccinations. This paper presents public voices, which should be seen as authentic (i.e. unmediated by the media or other political actors) and useful for policy making purposes. The policy implications include identifying social media as a main channel of communication during health crises, and acknowledging the voices heard on social media as authentic and useful for policy making. Human and financial resources need to be devolved specifically to social media. Health officials and experts need to be accessible on social media, and be equipped to readily provide the information, support and advice the public is looking for.

show abstract

Mass-Mediated Expertise as Informal Policy Advice

Cited by 28 publications

References 29 publications

Gap between science and media revisited: Scientists as public communicators

Gap between science and media revisited: Scientists as public communicators

Diagnostic Narratives

Social media as a platform for health-related public debates and discussions: the Polio vaccine on Facebook

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About