British newspapers priviledge health and medicine topics over other science news

Public Relations Review

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 321-333

  Weitkamp, Emma ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST OF ENGLAND   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0141761317     PISSN: 03638111     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0363-8111(03)00041-9     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Dorothy Nelkin, Selling Science: How the Press Covers Science and Technology, Revised ed., WH Freeman and Company, New York, 1995, pp. 105-112.
2. Hansen Anders Journalistic practices and science reporting in the British press Public Understanding of Science 3 1994 111-134
3. Wilkie Tom Sources in science: who can we trust Lancet 347 1996 1308-1311
4. Under the Ingelfinger Rule, peer-reviewed journals refuse to publish studies which have been published in whole or in part in another journal or newspaper. This largely prevents pre-release of research findings to the mass media. See for example, Dorothy Nelkin, op. cit., pp. 150-151.
5. Tom Wilkie, op. cit., pp. 1308-1311.
6. Entwistle Vicky Reporting research in medical journals and newspapers British Medical Journal 310 (6984) 1995 920 923.
7. Bartlett Christopher Sterne Jonathan Egger Matthias What is newsworthy? Longitudinal study of the reporting of medical research in two British newspapers British Medical Journal 325 2002 81-84
8. DeSemir Vladimir Ribas Cristina Revuelta Gemma Press releases of science journal articles and subsequent newspaper stories on the same topic JAMA 280 1998 294-295
9. Anders Hansen, op. cit., pp. 111-134
10. Girardi Enrico Petrosillo Nicola Aloisi Maria S. Rava Lucilla Ippolito Giuseppe Peer-reviewed articles and public health: the Mad Cow Affair in Italian newspapers JAMA 280 (3) 1998 292-294
11. Tom Wilkie, op. cit., pp. 1308-1311.
12. Vicky Entwistle, op. cit., pp. 920-923.
13. See for example, Frank Jefkins, revised Daniel Yadin Public Relations, 5th ed., Prentice Hall, London, 1998, pp. 78-98.
14. Vicky Entwistle, op. cit., pp. 920-923.
15. Conrad Peter Use of expertise: sources, quotes and voice in the reporting of genetics in the news Public Understanding of Science 8 1999 285-302
16. Anders Hansen, op. cit., pp. 111-134.
17. Peter Conrad, op. cit., pp. 285-302.
18. Pellechia Marianne G. Trends in science coverage: a content analysis of three US newspapers Public Understanding of Science 6 1997 49-68
19. Anke M. Van Trigt Lolkje T.W. de Jong-van Berg Flora M. Haaijer-Ruskamp Jaap Willems Theo F.J. Tromp Medical journalists and expert sources on medicines Public Understanding of Science 3 1994 309-321
20. Shirley Ramsey A benchmark study of elaboration and sourcing in science stories for eight American newspapers Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 761 1999 87-98
21. Gordon Shepherd R. Goode Erich Scientists in the Popular Press New Scientist 76 1977 482 484
22. John Durant, Scientific truth and political reality: professional and public perceptions of risk, in: Science, Policy and Risk: A discussion Meeting Held at the Royal Society on Tuesday, 18 March 1997, The Royal Society, London, 1997.
23. See for example, Frank Jefkins, Revised Daniel Yadin, op. cit., pp. 78-98
24. Roger Haywood, All about public relations, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, London, 1991, pp. 195-203.
25. Conrad Peter Weinberg Dana Has the gene for alcoholism been discovered three times since 1980? A news media analysis Perspectives on Social Problems 8 1996 3-25
26. Holly Hocking S. Effect of public relations efforts on media visibility of organisations Journalism Quarterly 622 1985 358-366
27. Ibid, pp. 358-366.
28. Williams Peter Nicholas David Journalists, news librarians and the internet New Library World 981137 1997 217-223
29. Stephen Ross, Don Middleberg, Media in cyberspace study, 5th ed., 1998, pp. 2-30, http://www.middleberg.com/sub_cyberspacestudy.html.
30. Ibid, pp. 2-30.
31. Peter Williams, David Nicholas, op. cit., pp. 217-223.
32. W. Trumbo Craig J. Sprecker Kim J. Dumlao Rebecca Gi Woong Yun Shearlean Duke Use of email and the Web by science writers Science Communication 224 2001 347-378
33. For a review see Craig W. Trumbo et al., op. cit., pp. 347-378.
34. Pavlik John The impact of technology on journalism Journalism Studies 12 2000 229-237
35. Ibid, pp. 229-237.
36. Craig W. Trumbo et al., op. cit., pp. 347-378.
37. Anders Hansen, op. cit., pp. 111-134.
38. Jane Gregory, Steve Miller, Science in Public: Communication, Culture and Society, Plenum, New York, 1998; Anders Hansen, op. cit., pp. 111-134.
39. Christopher Bartlett et al., op. cit., pp. 81-4
40. Vicky Entwistle, op. cit., pp. 920-923.
41. Shirley Ramsey, op. cit., pp. 482-484.
42. Dorothy Nelkin, op. cit., pp. 105-116, 107.
43. Anders Hansen, op. cit., pp. 111-134.
44. Peter Conrad, op. cit., pp. 285-302
45. Dorothy Nelkin, op. cit., pp. 106.
46. Stephen Middleberg, Don Ross, op. cit., pp. 2-30.
47. Peter Williams, David Nicholas, op. cit., pp. 217-223.
48. Stephen Middleberg, Don Ross, op. cit., pp. 2-30
49. Craig W. Trumbo et al., op. cit., pp. 347-378.