Journal of Urban Health

, 79:482 | Cite as

Print media coverage of risk-risk tradeoffs associated with West Nile encephalitis and pesticide spraying

  • John P. Roche
Various Topics

Abstract

When mosquito-borne West Nile virus emerged in the United States in 1999 and triggered pesticide spraying, society was faced with a controversy over an important risk-risk tradeoff—the risks of pesticide exposure versus those of West Nile encephalitis. Effective public communication about risk-risk tradeoffs is important because it can assist individuals and society in investing resources optimally. This study examined how effectively major North American print media in the year 2000 provided information on this risk-risk tradeoff. My colleagues and I found that the print media were generally ineffective in providing precise information about pesticide risks and in comparing risks of pesticide exposure with those of West Nile encephalitis. The media were also ineffective in mentioning the efficacy of pesticide spraying or comparing the economic costs of pesticide spraying with those of West Nile encephalitis. We suggest that greater effort in collecting and reporting precise risk information, fostering more active relationships between journalists and scientists/public health professionals, and recognizing biases resulting from preconceptions can help improve reporting by the print media and public health agencies on risk-risk tradeoffs associated with emerging insect-borne infectious diseases. These efforts could help improve public health by improving decision making related to the control of insect-borne diseases.

Keywords

Infectious diseases Pesticide spraying Risk-risk tradeoffs West Nile virus 

References

  1. 1.
    Peterson LR, Roehrig JT. West Nile virus: a reemerging global pathogen. Emerg Infect Dis. 2001;7:611–614.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marfin AA, Gubler DJ. West Nile encephalitis: an emerging disease in the United States. Clin Infect Dis. 2001;33:1713–1719.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Weiss D, Carr D, Kellachan J, et al. Clinical findings of West Nile virus infection in hospitalized patients, New York and New Jersey, 2000. Emerg Infect Dis. 2001;7:654–658.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Extension Toxicology Network. Pesticide Information Profile: Resmethrin. Corvallis: Oregon State University; 1996.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blondell J. Epidemiology of pesticide poisonings in the United States, with special reference to occupational cases. Occup Med State of the Art Rev. 1997;12:209–221.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shafey O, Sekereke HJ, Hughes BJ, Heber S, Hunter RG, Brooks RG. Surveillance for acute pesticide-related illness during the medfly eradication program—Florida, 1998. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 1999;48:1015–1027.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Reigert JR, Roberts JR. Recognition and Management of Pesticide Poisonings. Washington, DC: US Environmental Protection Agency; 1999. EPA 735-R-98-003.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Thier A. Balancing the risks: vector control and pesticide use in response to emerging illness. J Urban Health. 2001;78:372–381.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Covello VT, McCallum D, Pavlova M. Principles and guidelines for improving risk communication. In: Covello VT, McCallum D, Pavlova M, eds. Effective Risk Communication: the Role and Responsibility of Government and Nongovernmental Organizations. New York: Plenum Press; 1989:3–16.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Covello VT, Sandman P, Slovik P. Science and values in risk management. In: Mayo D, Hollander R, eds. Acceptable Evidence. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 1991:66–90.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gubler DJ. Resurgent vector-borne diseases as a global health problem. Emerg Infect Dis. 1998;4:442–450.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gratz NG. Emerging and resurging vector-borne diseases. Annu Rev Entomol. 1999;44:51–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hubalek Z, Halouzka J. West Nile fever—a reemerging mosquito-borne viral disease in Europe. Emerg Infect Dis. 1999;5:643–650.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Solomon T, Mallewa M. Dengue and other emerging flaviviruses. J Infect. 2001;42:104–115.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Epstein P. Is global warming harmful to health? Sci Am. 2000;283:50–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Miller JR. The control of mosquito-borne disease in New York City. J Urban Health. 2001;78:359–356.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gratz NG, Jany WC. What role for insecticides in vector control programs? Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1994;50(6 suppl):11–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Covello VT, Peters R, Wojtecki J, Hyde R. Risk communication, the West Nile virus epidemic, and bioterrorism: responding to the communication challenges posed by the intentional or unintentional release of a pathogen in an urban setting. J Urban Health. 2001;78:382–391.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Enserink M. Bioterrorism: this time it was real. Science. 2001;294:490–491.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mullin S. Public health and the media: the challenge now faced by bioterrorism. J Urban Health. 2002;79:12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ball P. Safety of the new fluoroquinolones compared with ciprofloxacin. J Chemother. 2000;12(suppl 1):8–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Slovic P. Science and values in risk management. In: Mayo D, Hollander R, eds. Acceptable Evidence. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 1991:48–65.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Griffin RJ. Using systematic thinking to choose and evaluate evidence. In: Friedman S, Dunwoody S, Rogers CL, eds. Communicating Uncertainty: Media Coverage of New and Controversial Science. Mahwah, NJ: Plenum Press; 1999:225–248.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Lichtenstein S. Facts and fears: understanding perceived risk. In: Schwing RC, Albers WA Jr, eds. Societal Risk Assessment: How Safe Is Safe Enough? New York: Plenum Press; 1980:181–216.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vlek CAJ, Stallen PJ. Judging risk and benefits in the small and in the large. Organ Behav Human Perform. 1981;28:235–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lindell MK, Earle TC. How close is close enough: public perceptions of the risks of industrial facilities. Risk Anal. 1983;3:245–254.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Johnson EJ, Tversky A. Representations of perceptions of risk. J Exp Psychol Gen. 1984;113:55–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Slovic P. Informing and educating the public about risk. Risk Anal. 1986;6:403–415.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Slovic P. Perception of risk. Science. 1987;236:280–285.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Marris C, Langford I, Saunderson T, O'Riordan T. Exploring the “psychometric paradigm”: comparisons between aggregate and individual analyses. Risk Anal. 1997;17:303–312.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Danovaro-Holliday MC, Wood AL, LeBaron CW. Rotavirus vaccine and the news media, 1987–2001. JAMA. 2002;287:1455–1462.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Slovic P. The Perception of Risk. London: Earthscan Publications; 2000.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Fischhoff B. Managing risk perception. Issues Sci Tech. 1985;2:83–96.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Fischhoff B. Risk perception and communication unplugged: 20 years of process. Risk Anal. 1995;15:137–145.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kitzinger J, Reilly J. The rise and fall of risk reporting: media coverage of human genetics research, “false memory syndrome,” and “mad cow disease.” Eur J Commun., 1997; 12:319–350.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lesley P. The changing evolutions of public relations. Public Relations Q. Winter 1982; 9–15.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Arkin EB. Translation of risk information for the public: message development. In: Covello VT, McCallum D, Pavlova M, eds. Effective Risk Communication: the Role and Responsibility of Government and Nongovernmental Organizations. New York: Plenum Press; 1989:127–135.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hartis D. Scientific uncertainties and how they affect risk communication In: Covello VT, McCallum D, Pavlova M, eds. Effective Risk Communication: the Role and Responsibility of Government and Nongovernmental Organizations. New York: Plenum Press; 1989:117–126.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Holsti O. Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1969.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wimmer RD, Dominick JR. Mass Media Research: an Introduction. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth; 1991.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Riffe D, Lacy S, Eico FG. Analyzing Media Messages: Using Quantitative Content Analysis in Research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1998.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Fischhoff B. Protocols for environmental reporting: what to ask the experts. Journalist. Winter 1985:11–15.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Friedman S. Environmental reporting: problem child of the media. Environment. 1983; 25:24–29.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Stocking SH. How journalists deal with scientific uncertainty. In: Friedman S, Dunwoody S, Rogers CL, eds. Communicating Uncertainty: Media Coverage of New and Controversial Science. Mahwah, NJ: Plenum Press; 1999:23–41.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    McCally M, Garg A, Oleskey C. The challenges of emerging illness in urban environments: an overview. J Urban Health. 2001;78:350–358.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Covello VT, Sandman P, Slovik P. Risk Communication, Risk Statistics, and Risk Comparisons: a Manual for Plant Managers. Washington, DC: Chemical Manufacturers Association; 1988.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Wilson R, Crouch E. Risk assessment and comparisons: an introduction. Science. 1987; 236:267–280.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Slovic P. Perception of risk. Science. 1987;236:280–285.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Lundgren R, McMakin A. Risk Communication: a Handbook for Communicating Environmental, Safety, and Health Risks, 2nd ed. Columbus, OH: Battelle Press; 1998.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hornig S. Science stories: risk, power and perceived emphasis. Journalism Mass Commun Q. 1990;67:767–776.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Coleman C. The influence of mass media and interpersonal communication on societal and personal risk judgements. Commun Res. 1993;20:611–628.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Sjoeberg L. Risk perception: experts and the public. Eur Psychol. 1998;3:1–12.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Roche JP, Muskavitch MAT. Limited precision in print media communication of West Nile virus risks. Sci Commun. In press.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Pechmann C. A comparison of health communication models: risk learning versus stereotype priming. Media Psychol. 2001;3:189–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Bohan P, Goldman L, Treser C. American Public Health Association. Maximizing public health protection with integrated vector control. Am J Public Health. 2000;91:22–23.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Baruch B. Helping the public make health risk decisions. In: Covello VT, McCallum D, Pavlova M, eds. Effective Risk Communication: the Role and Responsibility of Government and Nongovernmental Organizations. New York: Plenum Press; 1989:111–116.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The New York Academy of Medicine 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • John P. Roche
    • 1
  1. 1.Biology DepartmentBoston CollegeChestnut Hill

Personalised recommendations