IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/meanco/v11y2023i1p323-334.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Covid-19 Research in Alternative News Media: Evidencing and Counterevidencing Practices

Author

Listed:
  • Markus Schug

    (Department of Media, Knowledge, and Communication, University of Augsburg, Germany / Centre for Interdisciplinary Health Research, University of Augsburg, Germany)

  • Helena Bilandzic

    (Department of Media, Knowledge, and Communication, University of Augsburg, Germany / Centre for Interdisciplinary Health Research, University of Augsburg, Germany)

  • Susanne Kinnebrock

    (Department of Media, Knowledge, and Communication, University of Augsburg, Germany / Centre for Interdisciplinary Health Research, University of Augsburg, Germany)

Abstract

The Covid-19 pandemic has been accompanied by an excess of accurate and inaccurate information (infodemic) that has prevented people from finding reliable guidance in decision-making. Non-professional but popular science communicators—some with a political agenda—supply the public with scientific knowledge regarding Covid-19. This kind of communication represents a worrisome force in societal discourses on science-related political issues. This article explores online content ( N = 108 articles) of two popular German “alternative news” media ( NachDenkSeiten and PI News ) that present and evaluate biomedical research concerning Covid-19. Using thematic analysis, we investigated how scientific evidence was presented and questioned. Regarding the theoretical background, we drew on the concept of “evidencing practices” and ideas from argumentation theory. More specifically, we studied the use of the following three evidencing and counterevidencing practices: references to Data/Methods, references to Experts/Authorities, and Narratives. The results indicate that the studied alternative news media generally purport to report on science using the same argumentation mechanisms as those employed in science journalism in legacy media. However, a deeper analysis reveals that argumentation directions mostly follow preexisting ideologies and political agendas against Covid-19 policies, which leads to science coverage that contradicts common epistemic authorities and evidence. Finally, we discuss the possible implications of our findings for audience views and consider strategies for countering the rejection of scientific evidence.

Suggested Citation

  • Markus Schug & Helena Bilandzic & Susanne Kinnebrock, 2023. "Covid-19 Research in Alternative News Media: Evidencing and Counterevidencing Practices," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(1), pages 323-334.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v11:y:2023:i:1:p:323-334
    DOI: 10.17645/mac.v11i1.6049
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/6049
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/mac.v11i1.6049?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v11:y:2023:i:1:p:323-334. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.