Responsabilidad Social

As noted, the media, in particular, newspapers, are one of the leading sources of scientific information for the general public (Billington & Bibby, 1991; Hijmans et al., 2003; Nelkin, 1995; Nisbet & Lewenstein, 2002). Understanding this situation, researchers have, since the announcement of the first successful rDNA experiments in the late 1970s, been interested in how the mass media, in particular, newspapers, have reported biotechnology. This research has uncovered a number of consistent trends.

One of the earliest studies in the area was conducted by Pfund and Hofstadter (1981). Using content analysis, Pfund and Hofstadter examined the reportage on biomedical innovations in a number of major U.S. newspapers and magazines. They found that the coverage was event- led, for example, stories focussed on, “congressional hearings, court rulings or … scientific and research breakthroughs and press conferences” (Pfund & Hofstadter, 1981, p. 141) They argue this type of coverage leads to a type of pack journalism, leaving some issues and groups being marginalized and resulting in stories dealing with wider issues being relegated to back pages of newspapers (Pfund & Hofstadter, 1981).

More recently, Nisbet and Lewenstein (2002) have also found that newspaper coverage of biotechnology in the U.S. is driven by events. They state:

48

Biotechnology coverage has been heavily event centred or episodic within years, peaking or plummeting across week or month in correspondence to the latest major article appearing in Science or Nature, the announcements of politicians or regulatory bodies, a major announcement of a scientific meeting, or the occasional high-profile incident (p. 384).

As already stated, Dunwoody and Griffin (1993) argue that event-led reporting leads to sources being able to frame how issues are reported and also absolves journalists from examining the wider issues surrounding a topic. For example, in their analysis of newspaper coverage of PCB (polychlorinated biphenyls) contamination of the Sheboygan river in Milwaukee, Dunwoody and Griffin (1993) found that reliance on sources framed the issue in terms of “how to clean up the river” and “restoration of commercial and recreational fishing”(p. 42). Alternative frames such as who was responsible for the pollution, or the health risks associated with it were given limited or no attention.

Indeed, recent research shows that newspaper reporting of biotechnology is dominated by particular themes while others are consistently marginalized. Nisbet and Lewenstein (2002) in their longitudinal content analysis of U.S. newspaper coverage of biotechnology between 1970 and 1999 found that from the 1980s to the mid-1990s the dominant emphasis was on “DNA research in general, pharmaceuticals and vaccines, human inheritances and predictive medicine” (p. 381). They also found that coverage of biotechnology increased in the late 1990s after the announcement of the cloning of Dolly the sheep in 1997.

The patterns found by Nisbet and Lewenstein (2002) were similar to those found by Kohring and Gorke (2000) in their cross-cultural content analysis of newspaper coverage of genetic engineering. The study compared coverage of genetic engineering in U.S., German, French and British newspapers. They found that research, medicine and human applications (for instance, vaccines and genetic screening) were the main themes covered. Stories dealing with the agricultural and environmental effects of biotechnology were most common in German newspapers, but in the other countries surveyed they did not receive more than 10% of the coverage.

The increase in the number of stories found by Nisbet and Lewenstein (2002) had also been evident in Europe, with Durant et al. (1998) finding that from 1992 to 1997 the number of newspaper articles reporting on biotechnology increased by up to 60% from the previous five year period (1987 to 1991). During this period, in the 12 European countries they studied,

49

newspaper stories increased to an almost daily event in four countries, to a weekly news event for a further four and for the remaining four countries the issue appeared monthly or less frequently. However, since this survey Durant et al. (1989) note that the news media in these latter countries appeared to awaken to the issue of biotechnology and the newspaper stories on the issue subsequently increased. This increase was also accompanied by a decrease in public support for green or agricultural biotechnology and an increase in public support for red or medical biotechnology. It is argued that the decline in support for green

biotechnology occurred as a result of the political debates that followed the announcement of the cloning of Dolly the sheep in 1997, and the announcements of the releases of genetically modified organisms, in the form of staple food crops (Bauer, 2005a).

Dolly the sheep raised the issue of cloning and related technologies like stem-cell research into the news media spotlight. Studies using more qualitative methods of analysis have examined newspaper coverage of cloning and stem cell research. Petersen (2001) found that Australian newspapers portrayed genetic research in positive terms despite the announcement about Dolly the sheep. Hyde (2006), in his later study of news media accounts of cloning, found that newspapers and online news sources portrayed cloning, “in a positive, future- looking light” (p. 246). Many of the reports suggested that cloning would improve the quality of human life (Hyde, 2006). The positive framing of cloning research is also found in the reporting of stem cell research. Kitzinger and Williams (2005) found that the British reporting of stem cell research had many visions of the future benefits and potential of the research.

The dominance of the themes concerned with genetic research and medicine has left other themes concerning GM marginalized. Nisbet and Lewenstein (2002) found that themes dealing with, “ethics, legal regulation, public opinion, and other competing interests, including environmentalists, religious groups, bio-ethicists, consumer groups, and the public in general” (p. 385) were not covered by the newspapers examined. Kitzinger and Williams (2005) in their examination of reporting on embryo stem cell research argue that certain themes were missing from the reportage. They note that the coverage had an absence of:

feminist critiques (for example, concern about women as the source of embryos) and the lack of debate about potential health risks or reflection on the present therapeutic gap. In all the talk about the potential and ‘prospects’ of stem cell research there was also very little attention to the financial prospecting aspects of such work (p. 739).

50

Hyde (2006) also found in his analysis of cloning coverage reported by three print and three online U.S. newspapers that only a “small portion of the news reports covered the social or ethical issues connected to cloning” (p. 246).

In addition to the prominence of certain themes and the marginalization or lack of coverage of others, all the research in this area has found a positive bias towards biotechnology and its related technologies. It is acknowledged that the very early coverage “served to acknowledge the existence of controversy and provided fuel for intense policy deliberations” (Pfund & Hofstadter, 1981, p. 146). However, later coverage emphasized the benefits of biotechnology and this rendered “policy concerns over the safety and appropriateness of the technology to tangential status” (Pfund & Hofstadter, 1981, p. 146).

This positive tone in the reporting of biotechnology has continued right through until the late 1990s (see Durant et al., 1998; Hyde, 2006; Kitzinger & Williams, 2005; Kohring & Gorke, 2000; Nisbet & Lewenstein, 2002; Petersen, 2001; Petersen, Anderson & Allan, 2005). While concerns in the late 1990s with cloning and embryonic stem cell research and, to a lesser extent GM crops, increased the number of stories dealing with the possible negative effects of biotechnology, these were matched by an increase in the coverage of the potential benefits of the technology (Kitzinger & Williams, 2005; Nisbet & Lewenstein, 2002; Petersen, 2001)

There are a number of reasons proposed for this positive bias towards biotechnology. Firstly, unlike nuclear energy there have, “been no major catastrophes related to biotechnology” (Nisbet & Lewenstein, 2002, p. 386). Therefore, until such a disaster occurs it is likely that coverage will remain positive, in line with the cultural norm of science being seen as progressive for society. The increase in the potential benefits that accompanied the increase of stories in the late 1990s may be explained by the media’s need to appear balanced in its reporting. Finally, it is argued that the pro-biotechnology tone of the coverage is due to the dominance of certain source types. The reportage is normally dominated by scientific, industry and political sources (Hyde, 2006; Kohring & Gorke, 2000; Nisbet, Brossard, & Kroepsch, 2003; Nisbet & Lewenstein, 2002; Pfund & Hofstadter, 1981). For the most part, other sources such as environmentalists, religious leaders or dissident scientists are marginalized (see Nisbet et al., 2003; Nisbet & Lewenstein, 2002; Pfund & Hofstadter, 1981). This predominance of pro-biotechnology sources has also been prevalent in the

51

coverage of cloning and stem cell research, despite the rising concerns about the potential negative effects of such technologies (Hyde, 2006; Nisbet et al., 2003).

In summary, the news media reporting of biotechnology in the U.S. and Europe is event driven, and until the late 1990s was dominated by stories concerning genetic research, vaccines, pharmaceuticals and human applications. After this time, stories concerning cloning, embryonic stem cell research and to a lesser extent agricultural biotechnology, began to dominate the reportage. These reports began to raise some concerns over the possible negative consequences of such technology and yet these were ameliorated by increased reportage of the potential benefits. A positive tone towards biotechnology is a continued feature of the news reportage and this is possibly due to the predominance of scientific, industry and political sources favouring the technology.