A content analysis of coverage by The New York Times of medical research published in The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) and The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) in 1989, 1990, and 1991 indicates that coverage of JAMA increased by 50 percent after the journal's publication date was shifted from Friday to Wednesday in April 1990. This result illustrates the effectiveness of embargoed early access to journals as an information subsidy offered to medical and science journalists to attract news coverage of a journal.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Gandy, O.
1982. Beyond agenda-setting: Information subsidies and public policy. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
2.
Kassirer, J. P.
, and M. Angell. 1994. Violations of the embargo and a new policy on early publicity. New England Journal of Medicine330:1608-1609.
3.
Lundberg, G. D.1989. Providing reliable medical information to the public—Caveat lector. Journal of the American Medical Association262:945.
4.
Nelkin, D.
1995. Selling science: How the press covers science and technology. Rev. ed.New York: W. H. Freeman.
5.
Phillips, D. P.1991. Importance of the lay press in the transmission of medical knowledge to the scientific community. New England Journal of Medicine325:1180-1183.
6.
Relman, A. S.1988. Reporting the aspirin study: The Journal and the media. New England Journal of Medicine318:918-920.
7.
Scott, J.1990. Medical journals: Eye on the scoop. Los Angeles Times, 26 February, A24.
8.
Squires, B. P.1990. Keeping ahead of the media. Canadian Medical Association Journal142:919.
