Abstract
This paper describes an analysis of coverage of the risks from agricultural and food genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) from April 2002 to April 2004 in 14 news media from six countries (Canada, France, Germany, Spain, the UK and the USA) which was conducted as part of a review for the European Commission of the management of risk communication. A total of 597 relevant news articles were found and coded for their presentational tone, the types of risk (environmental, financial, health and political, in that order), the organisms described (mainly maize, rape and beet crops), and the documents, people and organisations cited. UK news media tended to be the most “scary” and Spanish ones the most “robust”. Articles quoting public perceptions, non-governmental environmental organisations and politicians tended to emphasize the risks of GMOs; those quoting scientists tended to downplay the risks and describe their potential benefits. Some suggestions for possible action by the European Commission are put forward, such as the facilitation of contact between journalists and scientists, but it is recognized that for some newspapers, their editorial wish to campaign will inevitably over-ride their reporters’ wish to present the truth.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Conrad, P. (1999), Uses of expertise: sources, quotes, and voice in the reporting of genetics in the news. Public Understanding of Science, 8(4): 285–302.
Cookson, C. (2001), New independent media centre aims to give scientists a voice. Financial Times, 30 January.
Dixon, B. (2003), Genes in food — why the furore? Biochemical Society Transactions, 31(2): 299–306.
Durant, J., Lindsey, N. (2000), The “Great GM Food Debate” — A Survey of Media Coverage in the First Half of 1999. Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, Report 138, May. Available at: http://www.parliament.uk/post/report138.pdf
Ewen, S. W. B., Pusztai, A. (1999), Effect of diets containing genetically-modified potatoes expressing Galanthus nivalis lectin on rat small intestine The Lancet, 354: 1353–1354.
Frewer, L. J., Miles, S., Marsh, R. (2002), The media and genetically modified foods: evidence in support of social amplification of risk. Risk Analysis, 22(4): 701–711.
Gaskell, G., Bauer, M. W., Durant, J., Allum, N. C. (1999), Worlds apart? The reception of genetically modified foods in Europe and the US. Science, 285: 384–387.
Gaskell, G., Allum, N., Stares, S., et al. (2003), Europeans and Biotechnology in 2002 — Eurobarometer 58.0, Report to the EC DG Research from the project ‘Life Sciences in European Society’ QLG7-CT-1999-00286
Hargreaves, I., Lewis, J., Spears, T. (2003), Towards a Better Map: Science, the Public and the Media. UK Economic and Social Research Council, Swindon. Available online at: http://www.esrc.ac.uk/esrccontent/DownloadDocs/Mapdocfinal.pdf
Heller, R. (2003), GM Nation? The Findings of the Public Debate. UK Department of Trade & Industry, London. Available at: http://www.gmnation.org.uk/docs/gmnation_finalreport.pdf
Horlick-Jones, T., Walls, J., Rowe, G., Pidgeon, N., Poortinga, W., O’Riordan, T. (2004), A Deliberative Future? An Independent Evaluation of the GM Nation? Public Debate about the Possible Commercialisation of Transgenic Crops in Britain, 2003. University of East Anglia, Understanding Risk Working Paper 04-02
Hunt, T., Greenfield, S. (2001), The appliance of science: scientists feel that journalists don’t understand them. A new media centre could bring the two camps together The Independent, London: 20 November.
Jesse, L. C. H., Obrycki, J. J. (2000), Field deposition of Bt transgenic corn pollen: lethal effects on the Monarch butterfly. Oecologia, 125(2): 241–248.
Kalaitzandonakes, N., Marks, L. A., Vickner, S. S. (2004), Media coverage of biotech foods and influence on consumer choice. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 86(5): 1238–1246.
Kessler, C., Economidis, I. (Eds) (2001), EC-Sponsored Research on Safety of Genetically Modified Organisms — a Review of Results. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities (EUR 19884) ISBN: 92-894-1527-4
Kone, D., Mullet, E. (1994), Societal risk perception and media coverage. Risk Analysis, 14(1): 21–24.
Lewis, J. (2001), Constructing Public Opinion — How Political Elites Do What They Like and Why We Seem to Go Along with It? New York: Columbia University Press. ISBN: 0-231-11766-3
Losey, J. E., Rayor, L. S., Carter, M. E. (1999), Transgenic pollen harms Monarch larvae. Nature, 399: 214.
Marks, L. A., Kalaitzandonakes, N., Allison, K., Zakharova, L. (2003), Media coverage of agrobiotechnology: did the butterfly have an effect? Journal of Agribusiness, 21(1): 1–20.
May, R. (2002), GM could be good for you. The Guardian, 29 November, p. 23.
Mitchener, B. (1998), Tomato wars: Safeway, Sainsbury’s say novel paste hits the spot in Britain. Consumer groups, officials fret over genetically modified ingredients — American biotech invasion. The Wall Street Journal Europe, 16 November, p. 1.
Nisbet, M. C., Lewenstein, B. V. (2002), Biotechnology and the American media: the policy process and the elite press, 1970 to 1999. Science Communication, 23(4): 359–391.
Peters, H. P. (2000), The committed are hard to persuade: recipients’ thoughts during exposure to newspaper and TV stories on genetic engineering and their effect on attitudes. New Genetics and Society, 19(3): 365–381.
Priest, S. H., Talbert, J. (1994), Mass media and the ultimate technological fix: newspaper coverage of biotechnology. Southwestern Mass Communication Journal, 10(1): 76–85.
Priest, S. H. (2000), US public opinion divided over biotechnology? Nature Biotechnology, 18: 939–942.
Priest, S. H., Gillespie, A. (2000), Seeds of discontent: expert opinion, mass media and the public image of agricultural biotechnology. Science and Engineering Ethics, 6: 529–539.
Priest, S. H., Ten Eyck, T. A. (2003), News coverage of biotechnology debates. Society, 40(6): 29–34.
Rupar, V. (2002), Keeping our options closed: the dominance of the conflict storytelling frame in media coverage of the Royal Commission’s Report on Genetic Modification in New Zealand. Political Science (Wellington), 54(2): 59–67.
Sears, M. K., Hellmich, R. L., Stanley-Horn, D. E., Oberhauser, K. S., Pleasants, J. M., Mattila, H. R., Siegfried, B. D., Dively, G. P. (2001), Impact of Bt corn pollen on monarch butterfly populations: a risk assessment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 98(21): 11937–11942.
Ten Eyck, T. A., Williment, M. (2003), The national media and things genetic: coverage in The New York Times (1971–2001) and The Washington Post (1977–2001) Science Communication, 25(2): 129–152.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lewison, G. The reporting of the risks from genetically modified organisms in the mass media, 2002–2004. Scientometrics 72, 439–458 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1769-2
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1769-2