Bioethicists have been increasingly used as expert sources in science and medical stories involving ethical issues. This case study examines how and why one bioethicist, Dr. Arthur L. Caplan, has become so ubiquitous. Organizational news routines provide the theoretical framework for a newspaper content analysis and interviews. As part of journalists’ small roster of trusted experts, Caplan has been the de facto bioethics representative for two decades, helping shape media discourse on bioethical issues. Caplan understands news routines, provides pithy quotes, and supports public engagement. Critics worry, however, that news consumers may conflate Caplan’s opinions with “the” ethical position.
AlbaekE.ChristiansenP. M.TogebyL. (2003). Experts in the mass media: Researchers as sources in Danish daily newspapers, 1961-2001. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 80, 937-948.
BerkowitzD. (1987). TV news sources and news channels: A study in agenda-building. Journalism Quarterly, 64, 508-513.
4.
BerkowitzD. (1992). Who sets the media agenda? The ability of policymakers to determine news decisions. In KennamerJ. D. (Ed.), Public opinion, the press, and public policy (pp. 81-102). Westport, CT: Praeger.
5.
BoyceT. (2006). Journalism and expertise. Journalism Studies, 7, 889-906.
6.
BrownJ. D.BybeeC. R.WeardenS. T.StraughanD. M. (1987). Invisible power: Newspaper news sources and the limits of diversity. Journalism Quarterly, 64, 45-54.
7.
BryantJ.Baggott laVelleL.SearleJ. (2005). Introduction to bioethics. Chichester, England: John Wiley.
8.
BurkettW. (1986). News reporting: Science, medicine and high technology. Ames: Iowa State University Press.
9.
CallahanD. (1996). The genetic revolution. In ThomasmaD. C.KushnerT. (Eds.), Birth to death: Science and bioethics (pp. 13-20). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
10.
CobbR. W.ElderC. (1971). The politics of agenda-building: An alternative perspective for modern democracy theory. Journal of Politics, 33, 892-915.
11.
ConradP. (1999). Uses of expertise: Sources, quotes, and voice in the reporting of genetics in the news. Public Understanding of Science, 8, 285-302.
12.
ConradP. (2001). Media images, genetics, and culture: Potential impacts of reporting scientific findings on bioethics. In HoffmasterB. (Ed.), Bioethics in social context (pp. 90-111). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
13.
CorbettJ. B.MoriM. (1999). Medicine, media, and celebrities: News coverage of breast cancer, 1960-1995. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 76, 229-249.
14.
DunwoodyS. (1987). Scientists, journalists, and the news. Chemical & Engineering News, 65(46), 47-49.
15.
DunwoodyS.RyanM. (1987). The credible scientific source. Journalism Quarterly, 64, 21-27.
16.
EvansJ. H. (2002). Playing God? Human genetic engineering and the rationalization of the public bioethical debate. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
17.
ForemanJ. (1993, March28). Cryonics draws a frozen few in New England. The Boston Globe, p. 1A.
18.
FrantzD. (1996, May30). Blood bank politics—A special report; Elizabeth Dole and Red Cross: 2 Powers at Work. The New York Times, p. A1.
19.
FriedmanS. M.DunwoodyS.RogersC. L. (Eds.). (1986). Scientists and journalists: Reporting science as news. New York, NY: Free Press.
20.
GansH. J. (1979). Deciding what’s news. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.
21.
GitlinT. (1980). The whole world is watching. Berkeley: University of California Press.
22.
GoodellR. (1977). The visible scientists. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.
23.
GoodellR. (1986). How to kill controversy: The case of recombinant DNA. In FriedmanS. M.DunwoodyS.RogersC. L. (Eds.), Scientists and journalists: Reporting science as news (pp. 170-181). New York, NY: Free Press.
24.
GoodmanE. (1997, February6). Expertise deflation. The Boston Globe, p. A19.
25.
GoodmanK. W. (1999). Philosophy as news: Bioethics, journalism and public policy. Journal of Medicine & Philosophy, 24, 181-200.
26.
GuthmannE. (2006, May31). Stanford go-getter has become go-to guy for those facing quandaries over new medical technologies. San Francisco Chronicle, p. E1.
IpaktchianS. (2011). Bioethics at midlife. Stanford Medicine, 28(1), 8-13.
29.
JonsenA. R. (1998). The birth of bioethics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
30.
KolataG. (2005, December16). Clone scandal: “A tragic turn” for science. The New York Times, p. A6.
31.
KovachB.RosenstielT. (2001). The elements of journalism: What newspeople should know and the public should expect. New York, NY: Crown.
32.
KruvandM. (2009). Bioethicists as expert sources in science and medical reporting. Newspaper Research Journal, 30(3), 26-41.
33.
LevineC. (2007). Analyzing Pandora’s box: The history of bioethics. In EckenwilerL. A.CohnF. G. (Eds.), The ethics of bioethics: Mapping the moral landscape (pp. 3-23). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
34.
LimogesC. (1993). Expert knowledge and decision making in controversy contexts. Public Understanding of Science, 2, 417-426.
35.
MaierS.KasomaT. (2005, May). Information as good as its source—An examination of source diversity and accuracy at nine daily U.S. newspapers. Paper presented at the annual conference of the International Communication Association, New York, NY.
36.
MartinS. E. (1991). Using expert sources in breaking science stories: A comparison of magazine types. Journalism Quarterly, 68, 179-190.
37.
MephamB. (2005). Bioethics: An introduction for the biosciences. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
38.
MooneyC.KirshenbaumS. (2009). Unpopular science: The crisis in journalism has gutted intelligent science reporting—just when we need it the most. Nation, 239(5), 20-24.
39.
NelkinD. (1995). Selling science: How the press covers science and technology (Revised ed.). New York, NY: Freeman.
40.
NelkinD. (2001). Beyond risk: Reporting about genetics in the post-Asilomar press. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 44, 199-207.
41.
NisbetM. C.BrossardD.KroepschA. (2003). Framing science: The stem cell controversy in an age of press/politics. International Journal of Press/Politics, 8(2), 36-70.
42.
NisbetM. C.LewensteinB. V. (2002). Biotechnology and the American media: The policy process and the elite press, 1970 to 1999. Science Communication, 23, 359-391.
43.
ParsiK. P.GeraghtyK. E. (2004). The bioethicist as public intellectual. American Journal of Bioethics, 4(1), 17-23.
PenceG. E. (1999). The bioethicist and the media. Princeton Journal of Bioethics, 2(1), 47-52.
46.
PetitC. (2007). Science writing: The changing landscape. Symmetry, 4(3), 34.
47.
PotterV. R. (1971). Bioethics: Bridge to the future. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
48.
RachelsJ. (1991). When philosophers shoot from the hip. Bioethics, 5(1), 67-71.
49.
ReeseS. D.DanielianL. H. (1994). The structure of news sources on television: A network analysis of “CBS News,” “Nightline,” “MacNeil/Lehrer” and “This Week With David Brinkley.”Journal of Communication, 44, 84-107.
50.
ReichZ. (2006). The process model of news initiative: Sources lead first, reporters thereafter. Journalism Studies, 7, 497-514.
51.
RogersE.DearingJ.ChangS. (1991). AIDS in the 1980s: The agenda-setting process of a public issue (Journalism Monographs No. 126). Columbia, SC: Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication.
52.
RollinB. E. (2006). Science and ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
53.
RosenfeldA. (1999). The journalist’s role in bioethics. Journal of Medicine & Philosophy, 24, 108-129.
54.
RubinD. M.HendyV. (1977). Swine influenza and the news media. Annals of Internal Medicine, 87, 769-774.
55.
ScottC. T. (2006). Stem cell now: From the experiment that shook the world to the new politics of life. New York, NY: Pi Press.
56.
ShepherdR. G. (1981). Selectivity of sources: Reporting the marijuana controversy. Journal of Communication, 31, 129-137.
57.
ShoemakerP. J.ReeseS. D. (1996). Mediating the message: Theories of influences on mass media content. White Plains, NY: Longman.
58.
SigalL. (1973). Reporters and officials: The organization and politics of newsmaking. Lexington, MA: Heath.
59.
SimonsonP. (2002). Bioethics and the rituals of the media. Hastings Center Report, 32(1), 32-39.
60.
SoleyL. C. (1994). Pundits in print: “Experts” and their use in newspaper stories. Newspaper Research Journal, 15, 65-75.
61.
SteeleJ. E. (1995). Experts and the operational bias of television news: The case of the Persian Gulf War. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 72, 799-815.
62.
SteinbockB.ArrasJ. D.LondonA. J. (Eds.). (2003). Ethical issues in modern medicine (6th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.
63.
StockingS. H. (1985). Effects of public relations efforts on media visibility of organizations. Journalism Quarterly, 62, 358-366.
64.
StolbergS. G. (2001, August2). Bioethicists find themselves the ones being scrutinized. The New York Times, p. A1.
65.
StolbergS. G. (2002, May5). It’s alive! It’s alive!The New York Times, p. D16.
66.
SumpterR. S.GarnerJ. T. (2007). Telling the Columbia story: Source selection in news accounts of a shuttle accident. Science Communication, 28, 455-475.
67.
TannerA. H. (2004). Agenda building, source selection, and health news at local television stations: A nationwide survey of local television health reporters. Science Communication, 25, 350-363.
68.
TannerA. H.FriedmanD. B. (2011). Authorship and information sourcing for health news on local TV web sites; an exploratory analysis. Science Communication, 33, 3-27.
TurkJ. V. (1986). Information subsidies and media content: A study of public relations influence on the news. Journalism Monographs, 100, 1-29.
74.
Van DijkT. A. (2004). About a year before the breakdown I was having symptoms. In SealeC. (Ed.), Health and the media (pp. 160-175). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
75.
WilfordJ. N. (2003). The birth of Science Times: A surprise, but no accident. The New York Times, F2.
76.
WimmerR. D.DominickJ. R. (2003). Mass media research: An introduction (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Thomson.
77.
YinR. K. (2003). Case study research designs and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
78.
ZitnerA. (1996, March24). Blood feud: New rules in battle for donors. The Boston Globe, p. B1.
