`Science journalism' without science journalists: notes on a Norwegian media paradox

Abstract

This article discusses recent developments of the relationship between scientists and journalists in Norway, a country without a tradition of science journalism. A general professional upgrading among journalists is now accompanied by a growing interest in science coverage. Paradoxically, this coverage is already extensive, though as yet not of high quality. For a proper understanding of the traditions as well as new tendencies within science coverage, we discuss cultures and traditions—within academic as well as in the media—and specific socio-historical contexts. The discussion is based on surveys among scientists interviewed on TV and in newspapers, and on a content analysis of the coverage of social science in Norwegian dailies.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ottosen, R. , 1987, Forskningsformidling i fjernsyn. En undersøkelse av samarbeidet mellom journalister og forskere i NRK-fjernsynet [Science Information on Television. A study of the cooperation between journalists and researchers in Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation television]. Research Report no. 2, Norwegian College for Journalists, Olso.

Ottosen, R. , 1988, Forskningsformidling og journalistikk. En undersøkelse av journalisters bruk av forskere som kilder i 13 norske dagsaviser [Science Information and Journalism. A study of journalists' use of researchers as sources in 13 Norwegian dailies]. Research Report no. 4, Norwegian College for Journalists, Oslo.

Eide, M. , 1992, Til oppslag. Samfunnsvitenskap, forskiningsformidling og massekommunikasjon [For print. Social Sciences, Science Information and Mass Communication]. Report, Department of Mass Communication, Bergen.

Solheim, T. , 1992, Samfunnsforskere i den offentlige debat [Social scientists in the public discourse]. Report, Department of Media Studies, University of Bergen.

Rokkan, S. , 1966, Norway: numerical democracy and corporate pluralism. Political Oppositions in Western Democracies, edited by Robert Dahl (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press).

Mathiesen, T. , 1993, Dagbladet, 24 March.

Andersen, A. G. , and Erlandsen, A. , 1992, Forskningsjournalistikk—en håndbok for journalister [Science Journalism—a Handbook for Journalists] (Fredrikstad: Department of Journalism).

Gans, H. J. , 1980, Deciding What's News: a Study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek and Time (New York: Vintage Books), p. 116.

Hansen, A. , and Dickinson, R. , 1992, Science coverage in the British mass media: media output and source input. Communications, 17(3), 365-377.

10.

The other categories constructed by Hansen and Dickinson are `science forum' (`publications in learned journals and conference presentations which journalists will consult on a routine basis'), `inter-media' suggesting a process of cross media agenda-setting), `colleague', `court reports' and `don't know'. See Hansen, A. , and Dickinson, R. , 1992, Science coverage in the British mass media: media output and source input. Communications, 17(3), 370-371.

11.

Moore, B. , and Singletary, M. , 1986, Scientific sources, perceptions of network news accuracy. Journalism Quarterly, Summer, 816-823.

12.

Tichenor, P. J. et al. , 1970, Mass communication accuracy in science news reporting. Journalism Quarterly, 47, 673-683.

13.

Holtet, E. Kr ., 1992, Etisk og juridisk minefelt (Ethical and judicial minefield). Forskningsjournalistikk—en håndbok for journalister [Science Journalism—a Handbook for Journalists], edited by A. G. Andersen and A. Erlandsen (Frednikstad: Department of Journalism).