Cancer stories (N = 5,327) in the top 50 U.S. newspapers were analyzed by a team of four coders and the results were compared with the earliest analyses of this type (from 1977 and 1980). Using cancer incidence rates as a comparison, three cancers were found to be consistently underreported (male reproductive, lymphatic/Hodgkin's, and thyroid) and four cancers were found to be consistently overreported (breast, blood/Leukemia, pancreatic, and bone/muscle). In addition, cancer news coverage consistently has focused on treatment rather than on other aspects of the cancer continuum (e.g., prevention), portrayed lifestyle choices (e.g., diet, smoking) as the most common cancer risk factor, and rarely reported incidence or mortality data. Finally, the data were compatible with the idea that personalization bias (e.g., celebrity profiles, event coverage) may explain some news coverage distortions.
This study explores the relationship between cancer newspaper coverage and public knowledge about cancer prevention, confirming self-reported associations between news exposure and cancer prevention knowledge with descriptions of newspaper coverage of modifiable cancer risks. Content analyses (N = 954) revealed that newspapers pay relatively little attention to cancer prevention. However, there is greater newspaper attention to tobacco and diet than to exercise, sun, and alcohol. Survey analysis (the National Cancer Institute's Health Information National Trends Survey) revealed that after controlling for differences based on gender, race, age, income, and education, attention to health news was significantly associated with knowledge about cancer risks associated with food and smoking but not for knowledge about exercise, sun, or alcohol. These findings conform to the findings of the content analysis data and provide a validation of a self-reported measure of media exposure, as well as evidence suggesting a threshold below which news coverage may not generate public knowledge about cancer prevention.
We explore differences in House candidates' campaign agendas across Web sites and televised ads, comparing the size and scope of their online and off-line issue priorities, their patterns of partisan issue ownership and issue trespassing, and the extent of issue convergence with the agendas of their opponents. Our results, based on a sample of 129 candidates in the 2000 election, indicate that Web and ad agendas are similar in a number of ways but that differences do exist across the venues. These differences have important theoretical implications for our understanding of candidate behavior and campaign effects as well as important practical implications for political communication researchers choosing venues for study.
The news media are a primary source of cancer prevention and detection information for the general public, but little is known about the content of cancer prevention and detection messages in mainstream media. This study examines how cancer prevention and screening efficacy messages are presented in cancer news media coverage. Efficacy messages provide information about skills related to prevention and screening behaviors. Analysis of cancer-related stories in 44 major US daily newspapers during 2003 (n = 2448) reveals that efficacy messages were rarely present in cancer stories. Efficacy messages were less likely to appear in stories that had a 'local' angle, but efficacy messages were more likely to appear in stories that contained 'mobilizing information' (additional resources for readers) or stories that mentioned highly preventable cancers (lung, skin, esophagus and bladder). The discussion includes a theory of norms for effectively influencing cancer-related behaviors through news reports. Implications of this work extend to the lack of efficacy messages when highly detectable cancers are mentioned, thus the lack of actionable information when health risks are presented, and a dearth of efficacy messages when localized information is present, each of which represent key areas for encouraging health journalists to include more efficacy statements.
The media are a frequent and sometimes sole source of cancer information for many people. News coverage of cancer can be influential to cancer-related practices such as prevention or detection behaviors, and sources cited by journalists may be influential in shaping this coverage. A content analysis (n = 3,656 stories) revealed that the most frequently cited sources in cancer news articles-research institutions and medical journals-receive disproportionately more attention compared to the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the American Cancer Society (ACS), and pharmaceutical companies. Research institutions were cited twice as frequently as medical journals, and more than three times as frequently as pharmaceutical companies. Most clinical trial stories were optimistic or neutral in tone, and tone was significantly related to citations of pharmaceutical companies and medical journals. Implications for effects of cancer coverage on behaviors, and the influence of sources such as research institutions and pharmaceutical companies, are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.