IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v27y2007i3p775-786.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk and the Media: A Comparison of Print and Televised News Stories of a Canadian Drinking Water Risk Event

Author

Listed:
  • S. Michelle Driedger

Abstract

This article explores the utility of using media analyses as a method for risk researchers to gain an initial understanding of how the public may perceive a risk issue or event based on how it is presented and communicated in news media stories. In the area of risk research, newspapers consistently provide coverage of both acute and chronic risk events, whereas televised news broadcasts report primarily acute risk events. There is no consensus in the literature about which news format (print vs. televised) may be better to study public conceptualizations of risk, or if one format (e.g., print) may be used as a surrogate measure for another format (e.g., televised). This study compares Canadian national televised and newspaper coverage of the same risk event: the E. coli contamination of a public drinking water supply. Using a content analysis, this study empirically demonstrates the overall similarity in story content coverage in both televised and print coverage, noting that televised coverage promotes primarily emotional story themes while print coverage tends to also include coverage of analysis and process. On this basis, the research draws two conclusions: 1) given its more comprehensive coverage, newspaper broadsheets may provide a better measure of media coverage of a risk event than televised coverage (if only one format can be studied); and 2) when the risk area of interest is chronic, and/or if the scale of analysis is at a community/local level (i.e., when it is unlikely that archived televised coverage is available), then a researcher may find the print media to be a more useful format to study.

Suggested Citation

  • S. Michelle Driedger, 2007. "Risk and the Media: A Comparison of Print and Televised News Stories of a Canadian Drinking Water Risk Event," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 775-786, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:27:y:2007:i:3:p:775-786
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2007.00922.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2007.00922.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2007.00922.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alastair Hetherington, 1985. "News, Newspapers and Television," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-349-18000-4, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mysha K. Clarke & Lara A. Roman & Tenley M. Conway, 2020. "Communicating with the Public about Emerald Ash Borer: Militaristic and Fatalistic Framings in the News Media," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-16, June.
    2. Anne-Maree Dowd & Peta Ashworth & Michelle Rodriguez & Talia Jeanneret, 2012. "CCS in the Media: An Analysis of International Coverage," Energy & Environment, , vol. 23(2-3), pages 283-298, May.
    3. Debra J. Davidson & Anthony Fisher & Gwendolyn Blue, 2019. "Missed opportunities: the absence of climate change in media coverage of forest fire events in Alberta," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 153(1), pages 165-179, March.
    4. Pierce, Jonathan J. & Boudet, Hilary & Zanocco, Chad & Hillyard, Megan, 2018. "Analyzing the factors that influence U.S. public support for exporting natural gas," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 666-674.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      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:wly:riskan:v:27:y:2007:i:3:p:775-786. 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.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

      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.