Public dissemination of research findings via the news media has become an important part of the scientific process. The dissemination of complex topics such as cancer has proven somewhat problematic in that news coverage is often judged as compounding, rather than alleviating, communication difficulties. This case study centers around one comprehensive cancer center (CCC) and examines communication stakeholders’ objectives in producing news coverage of cancer issues. The authors’ analysis adopts a constructionist perspective of news making, emphasizing actors’ power to shape news coverage rather than conceptualizing news as a public record of objectively newsworthy events. The authors’ data suggest widespread support for media communication of scientific findings but little articulation of definitive communication goals. It is concluded that without clear articulation of shared goals, communication efforts cannot effectively enhance public empowerment or effectively promote cancer prevention.
American Cancer Society. (2009). Cancer facts & figures 2009. Atlanta, GA: Author.
2.
Britten, N. ( 1995). Qualitative research: Qualitative interviews in medical research. British Medical Journal, 311, 251-253.
3.
Bush, J., Moffatt, S., & Dunn, C.E. ( 2001). Keeping the public informed? Public negotiation of air quality information. Public Understanding of Science , 10, 213-229.
4.
Caulfield, T. ( 2004). The commercialisation of medical and scientific reporting . PLOS medicine: A peer reviewed open-access journal. Public Library of Science, 1(3), e38.
5.
Clarke, J. ( 1992). Cancer, heart disease, and AIDS: What do the media tell us about these diseases?Health Communication, 4, 105-120.
6.
Clarke, J.N., & Everest, M.M. ( 2006). Cancer in the mass print media: Fear, uncertainty and the medical model. Social Science & Medicine, 62, 2591-2600.
7.
Davies, S. ( 2008). Constructing communication: Talking to scientists about talking to the public. Science Communication, 29, 413-434.
8.
Dixon, H., Scully, M., Wakefield, M., & Murphy, M. ( 2009). The prostate screening debate: Public reaction to medical controversy in the media. Public Understanding of Science , 18, 115-128.
9.
Field, H., & Powell, P. ( 2001). Public understanding of science versus public understanding of research. Public Understanding of Science , 10, 421-426.
10.
Geller, G., Bernhardt, B.A., Gardner, M., Rodgers, J., & Holtzman, N.A. (2005). Scientists’ and science writers’ experiences reporting genetic discoveries: Toward an ethic of trust in science journalism. Genetics in Medicine , 7, 198-205.
11.
Gregory, J., & Miller, S. ( 1998). Science in public: Communication, culture, and credibility . New York: Plenum .
12.
Gunter, B., Kinderlerer, J., & Beyleveld, D. ( 1999). The media and public understanding of biotechnology . Science Communication, 20, 373-394.
13.
Haas, J.S., Miglioretti, D.L., Geller, B., Buist, D.S.M., Nelson, D.E., Kerlikowske, K., et al. (2007). Average household exposure to newspaper coverage about the harmful effects of hormone therapy and population-based declines in hormone therapy use. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 22, 68-73.
14.
Han, P.K., Moser, R.P., & Klein, W.M. ( 2007). Perceived ambiguity about cancer prevention recommendations: Associations with cancer-related perceptions and behaviours in a US population survey. Health Expectations, 10, 321-336.
15.
Hansen, A. ( 1994). Journalistic practices and science reporting in theBritish press. Public Understanding of Science, 3, 111-134.
16.
Hartz, J., & Chappell, R. ( 1997). Worlds apart: How the distance between science and journalism threatens America’s future. Nashville, TN: Freedom Forum First Amendment Center.
17.
Hawkins, N.A., Berkowitz, Z., & Peipins, L.A. ( 2007).What does the public know about preventing cancer? Results from the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS). Health Education & Behavior. Published online May 3, 2007 . doi:10.1177/1090198106296770.
18.
Hilgartner, S., & Bosk, C.L. ( 1988). The rise and fall of social problems: A public arenas model. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 53-78.
19.
Houston, T.P., Fischer, P.M., & Richards, J.W. (1992). The public, the press and tobacco research. Tobacco Control, 1, 118-122.
20.
Linders, A. ( 1998). Abortion as a social problem: The construction of "opposite" solutions in Sweden and the United States. Social Problems , 45, 488-509.
21.
Lupton, D. ( 1994). Femininity, responsibility and the technological imperative: Discourses on breast cancer in theAustralian press. International Journal of Health Services, 24, 73-89.
22.
Martin-Sempere, M., Garzon-Garcia, B., & Rey-Rocha, J. ( 2008). Scientists’ motivation to communicate science and technology to the public: Surveying participants at the Madrid Science Fair . Public Understanding of Science, 17, 349-367.
23.
Miller, G.D., Cohen, L.N., Fulgoni, V.L., Heymsfield, S.B., & Wellman, N.S. ( 2006). From nutrition scientist to nutrition communicator: Why you should take the leap. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition , 83, 1272-1275.
24.
Miller, S. ( 2001). Public understanding of science at the crossroads . Public Understanding of Science, 10, 115-120.
25.
Moriarty, C.M., & Stryker, J.E. ( 2008). Prevention and screening efficacy messages in newspaper accounts of cancer. Health Education Research, 23, 487-498.
26.
Moriarty, C.M., Jensen, J.D., & Stryker, J.E. ( 2008). A content analysis of frequently cited sources in cancer news coverage: Examining the relationship between cancer news content and source citation. Paper presented at the International Communication Association Annual Meeting, Montreal, Quebec , Canada.
27.
National Cancer Institute. (2002). RFA: Centers for excellence in cancer communications research. Retrieved November 3, 2007, from http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-CA-03-007.html
28.
Nelkin, D. ( 1996). An uneasy relationship: The tensions between medicine and the media. Lancet, 347, 1600-1603.
29.
Niederdeppe, J., & Levy, A. ( 2007). Fatalistic beliefs about cancer prevention and three prevention behaviors. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention, 16, 998-1003.
30.
Phillips, D.P., Kanter, E.J., Bednarczyk, B., & Tastad, P.L. ( 1991). Importance of the lay press in the transmission of medical knowledge to the scientific community. New England Journal of Medicine, 325, 1180-1183.
31.
Powell, M., & Colin, M. ( 2008). Meaningful citizen engagement in science and technology: What would it really take? Science Communication, 30, 126-136.
32.
Rier, D. ( 2003). Work setting, publication and scientific responsibility . Science Communication, 24, 420-457.
33.
Schwartz, L.M., & Woloshin, S. ( 2004). The media matter: A call for straightforward medical reporting. Annals of Internal Medicine, 140, 226-228.
34.
Shim, M., Kelly, B., & Hornik, R. ( 2006). Cancer scanning and seeking is associated with knowledge, lifestyle choices and screening behavior. Journal of Health Communication, 11(Suppl. 1), 157-172.
35.
Spector, M., & Kitsuse, J. ( 1977). Constructing social problems. Menlo Park, CA: Cummings.
36.
Stryker, J.E., Moriarty, C.M. & Jensen, J.D. ( 2008). Effects of newspaper coverage on public knowledge about modifiable cancer risks. Health Communication, 23(4), 380-390.
37.
Tuchman, G. ( 1978). Making news: A study in the construction of reality . New York: Free Press.
38.
Viswanath, K., Breen, N., Meissner, H., Moser, R.P., Hesse, B., Steele, W.R., et al. (2006). Cancer knowledge and disparities in the information age. Journal of Health Communication, 11, 1-17.
39.
Wilkes, M.S., & Kravitz, R.L. ( 1992). Medical researchers and the media: Attitudes toward public dissemination of research. Journal of the American Medical Association, 268, 999-1003.
40.
Yin, R.K. ( 2003). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
