Scientists' and science writers' experiences reporting genetic discoveries: Toward an ethic of trust in science journalism

被引:25
作者
Geller, G
Bernhardt, BA
Gardner, M
Rodgers, J
Holtzman, NA
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Univ, Sch Med, Phoebe Berman Bioeth Inst, Baltimore, MD 21205 USA
[2] Johns Hopkins Univ, Genet & Publ Policy Studies, Sch Med, Baltimore, MD 21218 USA
[3] Johns Hopkins Univ, Dept Hlth Policy & Management, Bloomberg Sch Publ Hlth, Baltimore, MD 21218 USA
[4] Univ Penn, Sch Med, Dept Med, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
[5] Johns Hopkins Univ, Sch Med, Off Commun & Publ Affairs, Baltimore, MD USA
关键词
trust; media; genetics; ethics; qualitative research; science journalism;
D O I
10.1097/01.GIM.0000156699.78856.23
中图分类号
Q3 [遗传学];
学科分类号
071007 ; 090102 ;
摘要
Purpose: To describe the relationship between scientists and science writers and their experiences with media reporting of genetic discoveries. Methods: This study included individual interviews with 15 scientists who specialize in genetics and 22 science writers who have covered their stories and a qualitative analysis of the data. Results: Scientists and science writers place an equally high priority on accuracy of media reports. They agree on what makes genetics stories newsworthy and the particular challenges in reporting genetic discoveries (i.e., poor public understanding of genetics, the association of genetics with eugenics, and the lack of immediately apparent applications of genetic discoveries to human health). The relationship between scientists and bona fide science writers is largely positive. Scientists tend to trust, respect, and be receptive to science writers. Both scientists and science writers acknowledge that trust is an essential component of a good interview. Science writers report a fair degree of autonomy with respect to the relationship they have with their editors. Conclusion: To the degree that trust facilitates the access that science writers have to scientists, as well as higher quality interviews between scientists and science writers, trust might also contribute to higher quality media reporting. Therefore, scientists and science writers have an ethical obligation to foster trusting relationships with each other. Future research should systematically explore ways to cultivate such relationships and assess their impact on the quality of science journalism.
引用
收藏
页码:198 / 205
页数:8
相关论文
共 48 条
[1]  
ALTMAN LK, NY TIMES 0110, pC3
[2]  
[Anonymous], AM TALK SCI MED NEWS
[3]  
Boffey PM, 1999, LEA COMMUN SER, P81
[4]   Do the print media "hype" genetic research? A comparison of newspaper stories and peer-reviewed research papers [J].
Bubela, TM ;
Caulfield, TA .
CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, 2004, 170 (09) :1399-1407
[5]   Trust us to make a difference: Ensuring public confidence in the integrity of clinical research [J].
Cohen, JJ .
ACADEMIC MEDICINE, 2001, 76 (02) :209-214
[6]   The changing meanings of "mutation": A contextualized study of public discourse [J].
Condit, CM ;
Achter, PJ ;
Lauer, I ;
Sefcovic, E .
HUMAN MUTATION, 2002, 19 (01) :69-75
[7]   Genetic optimism: Framing genes and mental illness in the news [J].
Conrad, P .
CULTURE MEDICINE AND PSYCHIATRY, 2001, 25 (02) :225-247
[8]   Introduction: Sociological perspectives on the new genetics: an overview [J].
Conrad, P ;
Gabe, J .
SOCIOLOGY OF HEALTH & ILLNESS, 1999, 21 (05) :505-516
[9]   Science writers' reactions to a medical "breakthrough" story [J].
Cooper, CP ;
Yukimura, D .
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2002, 54 (12) :1887-1896
[10]   Conflict of interest and the public trust [J].
DeAngelis, CD .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2000, 284 (17) :2237-2238