News Narratives about Nano S&T in Major U.S. and Non-U.S. Newspapers

Abstract

The author of this content analytic study examines news narratives about nano science and technology (nano S&T) in major U.S. and non-U.S. newspapers by taking a random sample of 350 articles published from1988 through mid-July 2004 froma universe of 1,330 articles. In addition to identifying dominant frames or content themes, the author evaluates whether there is a dominant tone or sentiment regarding the ethical, legal, and societal implications of developments and issues in nano S&T. Scientific discoveries or projects and the social effects of nano S&T are the dominant frames. The ratio of articles leaning toward the sentiment that benefits outweigh risks versus that risks outweigh benefits is three to one.

Den svenska modellen för nanoteknik – mer effektiv än reflexiv?

“…Ett möjligt exempel på detta är det stora intresset policysystemet visar för allmänhetens uppfattningar och kunskaper om nanoteknik, vilket ges forskningsmedel inom ramen för ELSA-satsningar i t ex USA. I sig är denna mediaforskning intressant (se exempelvis : Stephens 2005;Lewenstein 2005;Bainbridge 2002;Macoubrie & Cobb 2004). En instrumentell inramning skulle vara att använda forskningen som bas för information och kommunikation om nanoteknik med syfte att öka allmänhetens acceptans för den planerade utvecklingen, vilket påpekas av Ebbesen (2008).…”

Nanotechnology, Society, and Environment

“…They emphasize and omit information and, within the framing theories of Gamson (1992) and Benford and Snow (2000), there are conscious or unconscious attempts by actors to add credence to these patterns by drawing on what others may believe, thereby constructing a collective identity for or against a concept. There are perhaps some common observations that can be made about nanotechnology in the media and of audience/reader responses: first, there is little public knowledge of the subject; second, economic and global issue frames are prominent (see also Hornig Priest (2006), Stephens (2005) and Anderson et al (2005) for the identification of these types of frames 5 ); and third, nanotechnology peaked in coverage between 2003 and 2005. Many of these studies examine audience perceptions from pre-selected newspaper frames (Cobb, 2005;Schütz and Wiedemann, 2008).…”

“…As an indicator of the cultural resonance of the economic story of nanotechnology, several media analysis studies have shown the excessive framing of nanotechnology in economic terms, particularly in the US media (Gorss and Lewenstein, 2005 ;Schütz and Wiedemann, 2008;Stephens, 2005;Gaskell et al, 2005) (see Section 5.145.7.3). In this highly strategic focus, there is a consensus on economic benefit, but scant coverage on any kind of risk, whether financial, environmental, health or otherwise.…”

“…Coverage by the mass media has been used as a key barometer for ideas, opinions and ideological biases towards the concept of nanotechnology (Anderson et al 2005;Cobb, 2005;Cobb and Macoubrie, 2004; Hornig Priest, 2006;Stephens, 2005;Scheufele and Lewenstein, 2005;Schütz and Wiedemann, 2008). While news media will cover nanoparticle risks from time-to-time, coverage is scant across the world and, not surprisingly, awareness is limited (Anderson et al, 2005).…”

The larger world of nano

“…Only about half of them mention societal implications at all; of those that do, positive presentations outweigh negative ones by more than 3 to 1. 12 Still, many nanoscientists and policymakers fear that a major publicity disaster could push the public into opposition. Indeed, the societal-dimensions mandate in the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act of 2003 was meant, in large part, to help nanoscientists counteract a well-publicized 2000 anti-nanotech screed by William Joy in Wired and Michael Crichton's sensationalist 2002 antinanotech novel, Prey.…”