220 likes | 280 Views
m edia and science p olicy debates matthew nisbet american university school of communication washington dc. @ AgeofEngagement. Agenda & Frame Building . Judgments & Decisions. Salience. Attention. Public Experts Policymakers NGOs Journalists. Importance. Evaluation. Media Agenda.
E N D
media and science policy debatesmatthewnisbetamerican universityschool of communicationwashingtondc @AgeofEngagement
Agenda & Frame Building Judgments & Decisions Salience Attention Public Experts Policymakers NGOs Journalists Importance Evaluation Media Agenda Context Relevance Attribution
Mediated Issue Development Nisbet, Brossard, Kroepsch, 2003; Nisbet & Huge, 2006; Downs, 1972; Hilgartner & Bosk, 1988; McComas & Shanahan, 1999 pre-problem stage DramaticDiscourse Technical Discourse Dramatic Discourse Technical Discourse transition transition political / opinion transition transition specialist Cycle Continues specialist Political/ opinion Focusing Event Media attention Type of journalist overtly political policy arena administrative policy arena overtly political policy arena administrative policy arena
Technical Discourse Nisbet, Brossard, Kroepsch, 2003 NY Times and Washington Post
Dramatic Discourse Nisbet, Brossard, Kroepsch, 2003 NY Times and Washington Post
Balance as Bias or Flogging a Dead Norm? Boykoff& Boykoff, 2004; Boykoff, 2007 Coverage 1988 to 2002 at NYTimes, Wpost, WSJ, and LA Times
Balance as Bias or Flogging a Dead Norm? Boykoff& Boykoff, 2004; Boykoff, 2007 NYTimes, Wpost, WSJ, LA Times, and USA Today.
FOX NEWS VIEWING Feldman et al. (2011).
Stage 1: In-Depth Interviews w/ 70 Subjects from Six Distinct Audience Segments (Summer 2009) Maibach, E., Nisbet, M.C. et al. (2010). BMC Public Health 10: 299.
Segments 4-6:Sentence Specific Reaction To Public Health Essay Scores reflect respondent average values by segment for the difference between the number of times each of 18 sentences were marked “especially clear or helpful” and “especially confusing or unhelpful.”