In an attempt to qualify changes to science news reporting due to the impact of the Internet, we studied all science news articles published in Danish national newspapers in a November week in 1999 and 2012, respectively. We find the same amount of science coverage, about 4% of the total news production, in both years, although the tabloids produce more science news in 2012. Online science news also received high priority. Journalists in 2012 more often than in 1999 make reference to scientific journals and cite a wider range of journals. Science news in 2012 is more international and politically oriented than in 1999. Based on these findings, we suggest that science news, due partly to the emergence of online resources, is becoming more diverse and available to a wider audience. Science news is no longer for the elite but has spread to virtually everywhere in the national news system.
AlbækE (2011) The interaction between experts and journalists in news journalism. Journalism12: 335–348.
2.
AlbækEChristiansenPMTogebyL (2003) Experts in the mass media: Researchers as sources in Danish daily newspapers, 1961–2001. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly80: 937–948.
3.
AndersonAAllanSPetersenAWilkinsonC (2005) The framing of nanotechnologies in the British newspaper press. Science Communication27: 200–220.
4.
BauerMWPetkovaKBoyadjievaPGornevG (2006) Long-term trends in the public representation of science across the ‘Iron Curtain’: 1946–1995. Social Studies of Science36: 99–131.
5.
BauerMWRagnarsdottirARudolfsdottirADurantJ (1995) Science and Technology in the British Press, 1946–1990. London: Science Museum.
6.
BoczkowskiPJ (2005) Digitizing the News: Innovation in Online Newspapers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7.
BucchiMMazzoliniRG (2003) Big science, little news: Science coverage in the Italian daily press, 1946–1997. Public Understanding of Science12: 7–24.
8.
ClarkFIllmanDL (2006) A longitudinal study of the New York Times science times section. Science Communication27: 496–513.
9.
De DomenicoMLimaAMougelPMusolesiM (2013) The anatomy of a scientific rumor. Scientific Reports3: 2980.
10.
De SemirVRibasCRevueltaG (1998) Press releases of science journal articles and subsequent newspaper stories on the same topic. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association280: 294–295.
11.
ElmerCBadenschierFWormerH (2008) Science for everybody? How the coverage of research issues in German newspapers has increased dramatically. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly85: 878–893.
FahyDNisbetMC (2011) The science journalist online: Shifting roles and emerging practices. Journalism12: 778–793.
14.
GerhardsJSchäferMS (2010) Is the internet a better public sphere? Comparing old and new media in the USA and Germany. New Media & Society12: 143–160.
15.
GranadoA (2011) Slaves to journals, serfs to the web: The use of the internet in newsgathering among European science journalists. Journalism12: 794–813.
HabelMALiddonNStrykerJE (2009) The HPV vaccine: A content analysis of online news stories. Journal of Women’s Health18: 401–407.
18.
HydeJ (2006) News coverage of genetic cloning when science journalism becomes future-oriented speculation. Journal of Communication Inquiry30: 229–250.
KjærgaardRS (2008) Making a small country count: Nanotechnology in Danish newspapers from 1996 to 2006. Public Understanding of Science19(1): 80–97.
22.
KrieghbaumH (1941) American newspaper reporting of science news. Kansas State College BulletinXXV(5): 1–73.
23.
KrippendorffK (2013) Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology, 3rd edn.London: SAGE.
24.
KulveHT (2006) Evolving repertoires: Nanotechnology in Daily newspapers in the Netherlands. Science as Culture15(4): 367–382.
25.
LoganRAZengjunPWilsonNF (2000) Science and medical coverage in the Los Angeles Times and the Washington post–A six-year perspective. Science Communication22(1): 5–26.
26.
LundAB (2013) Mangfoldighed i dansk dagspresse [Diversity in the Danish daily press]. Copenhagen: Møller forlag.
27.
LundABWilligIBlach-ØrstenM (2009) Hvor kommer nyhederne fra? Den journalistiske fødekæde i Danmark før og nu [Where does the news come from? The journalistic food chain in Denmark then and now]. Aarhus: Ajour.
28.
NielsenKH (2005) Between understanding and appreciation: Current science communication in Denmark. Journal of Science Communication4(4). Available at: http://jcom.sissa.it/archive/04/04/A040402/
29.
PellechiaMG (1997) Trends in science coverage: A content analysis of three US newspapers. Public Understanding of Science6(1): 49–68.
30.
PetersHPBrossardDDe CheveignéSDunwoodySKallfassMMillerS. (2008) Science-media interface: It’s time to reconsider. Science Communication30: 266–276.
31.
RiffeDAustCFLacySR (1993) The effectiveness of random, consecutive day and constructed week sampling in newspaper content analysis. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly70(1): 133–139.
32.
SchäferMS (2009) From public understanding to public engagement: An empirical assessment of changes in science coverage. Science Communication30(4): 475–505.
33.
StephensLF (2005) News narratives about nano S&T in major U.S. and Non-U.S. newspapers. Science Communication27(2): 175–199.
34.
SuleskiJIbarakiM (2010) Scientists are talking, but mostly to each other: A quantitative analysis of research represented in mass media. Public Understanding of Science19(1): 115–125.
35.
TrenchB (2007) How the internet changed science journalism. In: BauerMWBucchiM (eds) Journalism, Science and Society: Science Communication between News and Public Relations. New York, NY; London: Routledge, pp. 133–142.
36.
Van der WurffRLaufE (eds) (2005) Print and Online Newspapers in Europe: A Comparative Analysis in 16 Countries. Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis.
37.
WeitkampE (2003) British newspapers privilege health and medicine topics over other science news. Public Relations Review29(3): 321–333.
