This study examines how mainstream journalists who microblog negotiate their professional norms and practices in a new media format that directly challenges them. Through a content analysis of more than 22,000 of their tweets (postings) on the microblog platform Twitter, this study reveals that the journalists more freely express opinions, a common microblogging practice but one which contests the journalistic norm of objectivity (impartiality and nonpartisanship). To a lesser extent, the journalists also adopted two other norm-related microblogging features: providing accountability and transparency regarding how they conduct their work and sharing user-generated content with their followers. The journalists working for national newspapers, national television news divisions, and cable news networks were less inclined in their tweets than their counterparts working for less "elite" news outlets to relinquish their gatekeeping role by sharing their stage with other news gatherers and commentators, or to provide accountability and transparency by providing information about their jobs, engaging in discussions with other tweeters, writing about their personal lives, or linking to external websites.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Although most experts agree that vaccines do not cause autism, a considerable portion of the American public believes in a link. In an experiment (N = 371), we identified journalistic balance as a source of misperception about this issue and examined ways to attenuate misperceptions. In particular, by including weight‐of‐evidence information (i.e., stating that only one view is supported by evidence and a scientific consensus), we explored whether an article can present conflicting views without causing misperceptions. Including weight‐of‐evidence information fostered more accurate beliefs about an autism–vaccine link, but only for people with favorable pre‐existing scientific views. However, this conditional effect disappeared when visual exemplars accompanied weight‐of‐evidence information. The findings of this study have both theoretical and practical implications for science communication.

No abstract

Scholars have examined how news media frame events, including responsibility for causing and fixing problems, and how these frames inform public judgment. This study analyzed 281 newspaper articles about a controversial medical study linking the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccination with autism. Given criticism of the study and its potential negative impact on vaccination rates across multiple countries, the current study examined actors to whom news media attributed blame for the MMR-vaccine association, sources used to support those attributions, and what solutions (e.g., mobilizing information), if any, were offered. This study provides unique insight by examining the evolution of these attributions over the lifetime of the controversy. Findings emphasize how news media may attribute blame in health risk communication and how that ascription plays a potentially vital role in shaping public behavior. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

This study explores the use of Twitter by political reporters and commentators-an understudied population within the rapidly growing literature on digital journalismcovering the 2012 Republican and Democratic conventions. In particular, we want to know if and how the "affordances" of Twitter are shaping the traditional norms and routines of U.S. campaign reporting surrounding objectivity, transparency, gatekeeping, and horse race coverage, and whether Twitter is bursting the "bubble" of insider talk among reporters and the campaigns they cover. A sample derived from all tweets by over 400 political journalists reveals a significant amount of opinion expression in reporters' tweets, but little use of Twitter in ways that improve transparency or disrupt journalists' (and campaigns') role as gatekeepers of campaign news. Overall, particularly when looking at what political journalists retweet and what they link to via Twitter, the campaign "bubble" seems at the moment to have remained largely intact.