UK science press officers, professional vision and the generation of expectations

Public Understanding of Science

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 55-69

  Samuel, Gabrielle ^a   Williams, Clare ^a   Gardner, John ^b  

^a BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

hype; media; press officers; professional vision; sociology of expectations

Indexed keywords

EID: 85007189926     PISSN: 09636625     EISSN: 13616609     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0963662515597188     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Autzen C, (2014) Press releases – The new trend in science communication. Journal of Science Communication 13(3). Available at: http://jcom.sissa.it/sites/default/files/documents/JCOM_1303_2014_C02.pdf
2. Borchelt RE, Nielsen KH, (2008) Public relations in science: Managing the trust portfolio. In: Bucchi M, Trench B, (eds) Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology. London: Routledge, pp. 147–158.
3. Borup M, Brown N, Konrad K, Van Lente H, (2006) The sociology of expectations in science and technology. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 18(3): 285–298.
4. Brechman J, Lee C, Cappella JN, (2009) Lost in translation? A comparison of cancer-genetics reporting in the press release and its subsequent coverage in the press. Science Communication (30): 453–474.
5. Brown N, (2003) Hope against hype – Accountability in biopasts, presents and futures. Social Studies 16: 3–21.
6. Bubela T, Nisbet MC, Borchelt R, Brunger F, Critchley C, Einsiedel E. (2009) Science communication reconsidered. Nature Biotechnology 27(6): 514–518.
7. Castell S, Charlton A, Clemence M, Pettigrew N, Pope S, Quigley A. (2014) Public Attitudes to Science 2014. Ipsos MORI Social Research Institute and Department of Business, Innovation and Skills. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/348830/bis-14-p111-public-attitudes-to-science-2014-main.pdf
8. Caulfield T, (2005) Popular media, biotechnology, and the ‘cycle of hype’. Houston Journal of Health Law and Policy 5: 213–233.
9. Fournier V, (2000) Boundary work and the (un)making of the professions. In: Malin N, (ed.) Professionalism, Boundaries and the Workplace. London: Routledge, pp. 67–86.
10. Fox F, (2012) Second submission by the Science and Media Centre. Available at: http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Second-submission-to-Inquiry-from-Guidelines-for-science-and-health-reporting-31.05.12.pdf
11. Gardner J, Samuel G, Williams C, (2015) Sociology of low expectations: Recalibration as innovation work in biomedicine. Science, Technology, & Human Values. Epub ahead of print 11 May. DOI: 10.1177/0162243915585579.
12. Goodwin C, (1994) Professional vision. American Anthropologist 96: 606–633.
13. Heath C, Luff P, (eds) (2000) Technology as Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14. Henderson L, Kitzinger J, (2007) Orchestrating a science ‘event’: The case of the human genome project. New Genetics and Society 26(1): 65–83.
15. Kitzinger J, (2008) Questioning hype, rescuing hope? The Hwang stem cell scandal and the reassertion of hopeful horizons. Science as Culture 17(4): 417–434.
16. Lynch M, (1985) Art and Artifact in Laboratory Science: A Study of Shop Work and Shop Talk in a Research Laboratory. Boston, MA: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
17. Michael M, (2000) Futures of the present: From performativity to prehension. In: Brown N, Rappert B, Webster A, (eds) Contested Futures: A Sociology of Prospective Science and Technology. Aldershot and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, pp. 21–42.
18. Monti MM, Vanhaudenhuyse A, Coleman MR, Boly M, Pickard JD, Tshibanda L. (2010) Willful modulation of brain activity in disorders of consciousness. New England Journal of Medicine 362(7): 579–589.
19. Nelkin D, (1996) An uneasy relationship: The tensions between medicine and the media. The Lancet 347(9015): 1600–1603.
20. Nerlich B, Dingwall R, Clarke DD, (2002) The book of life: How the completion of the human genome project was revealed to the public. Health: An Interdisciplinary Journal for the Social Study of Health, Illness and Medicine 6(4): 445–469.
21. Novick G, (2008) Is there a bias against telephone interviews in qualitative research? Research in Nursing & Health 31: 391–398.
22. Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2013) Novel neurotechnologies: Intervening in the brain, June. Available at: http://nuffieldbioethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Novel_neurotechnologies_report_PDF_web_0.pdf
23. Pantarotto CA, Jori A, (2007) A PR strategy without a PR office? In: Bauer MW, Bucchi M, (eds) Journalism, Science and Society: Science Communication between News and Public Relations. New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 193–202.
24. Perrotta M, (2012) The Study of Technoscientific Imaging in STS. TECNOSCIENZA: Italian Journal of Science & Technology Studies 3(2): 163–175.
25. Peters HP, Brossard D, De Cheveigne S, Dunwoody S, Kallfass M, Miller S. (2008) Science-media interface. Science Communication 30: 266–276.
26. Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism (2010) A study of the news ecosystem of one American city, 11 January. Available at: http://www.journalism.org/2010/01/11/how-news-happens/
27. Racine E, Gareau I, Doucet H, Laudy D, Jobin G, Schraedley-Desmond P, (2006) Hyped biomedical science or uncritical reporting? Press coverage of genomics (1992–2001) in Québec. Social Science & Medicine 62(5): 1278–1290.
28. Racine E, Waldman S, Rosenberg J, Illes J, (2010) Contemporary neuroscience in the media. Social Science & Medicine 71(4): 725–733.
29. Rödder S, (2009) Reassessing the concept of a medialization of science: A story from the ‘book of life’. Public Understanding of Science 18: 452–463.
30. Rose SP, (2003) How to (or not to) communicate science. Biochemical Society Transaction 31(2): 307–312.
31. Samuel G, Kitzinger J, (2013) Reporting consciousness in coma: Media framing of neuroscientific research, hope, and the response of families with relatives in vegetative and minimally conscious states. JOMEC Journal. Available at: http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/jomec/jomecjournal/3-june2013/Kitzinger_Samuel_coma.pdf
32. Schäfer MS, (2011) Sources, characteristics and effects of mass media communication on science: A review of the literature, current trends and areas for future research. Sociology Compass 5(6): 399–412.
33. Schoen D, (2008) Newspapers still viable. The Huffington Post, 19 December. Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/doug-schoen/newspapers-still-viable_b_152354.html
34. Seale C, (2003) Media and Health. London: SAGE.
35. Stempra (2009) The Stempra guide to being a good press officer. Available at: http://stempra.org.uk/wp-content/themes/stempra/downloads/stempra_guide_to_being_a_press_officer.pdf
36. Sumner P, Vivian-Griffiths S, Boivin J, Williams A, Venetis CA, Davies A. (2014) The association between exaggeration in health related science news and academic press releases: Retrospective observational study. British Medical Journal 349: g7015.
37. TNS Opinion and Social (2013) Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), Science and Technology. Special Eurobarometer 401. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_401_en.pdf
38. Tutton R, (2011) Promising pessimism: Reading the futures to be avoided in biotech. Social Studies of Science 41(3): 411–429.
39. Wastler A, (2013) Newspaper Bane: Nobody reads the stories. CNBC, 10 August 2013. Available at: http://www.cnbc.com/id/100952247
40. Weimann G, Lev E, (2006) Mass-mediated medicine. The Israeli Medical Association Journal 8: 757–762.
41. Weingart P, (2012) The Lure of the Mass Media and its Repercussions on Science. Theoretical Considerations on the ‘Medialization of Science’. In: Rödder S, Franzen M, Weingart P, (eds) The Sciences’ Media Connection - Public Communication and its Repercussions. New York: Springer.
42. Weitkamp E, (2014) On the roles of scientists, press officers and journalists. Journal of Science Communication 13(3). Available at: http://jcom.sissa.it/sites/default/files/documents/JCOM_1303_2014_E.pdf.
43. Williams A, Gajevic S, (2013) Selling science: Source struggles, public relations, and UK press coverage of animal–human hybrid embryos. Journalism Studies 14(4): 507–522.
44. Woloshin S, Schwartz LM, (2002) Press releases: Translating research into news. Journal of the American Medical Association 287(21): 2856–2858.