Costs and Benefits of Stem Cell Research and Treatment: Media Presentation and Audience Understanding in Hungary

Abstract

This study examined the press coverage and audience understanding of the costs and benefits of stem cell research/treatment in Hungary. A content analysis of five newspapers and a focus group study was conducted. The way participants talked about the costs and benefits in many aspects echoed the dominant framing of the issue in the press (medical benefits = main benefit, high expense of treatment = dominant negative aspect). Even though participants applied analogical reasoning to formulate some risks that were missing from the reporting on stem cells, many gaps of the media coverage were echoed in gaps in lay discussions.

GM Crops in Hungary: Comparing Mass Media Framing and Public Understanding of Technoscientific Controversy

“…A comparison of the results to my earlier findings on the media representation of stem cell research and treatment (Vicsek, 2011;Vicsek & Gergely, 2011) also shows that similarly to what was found in many other countries (Bauer, 2005a), in Hungary too a difference could be seen in the applied media frames for red and green biotechnology, with negative frames utilized more often in the case of green biotechnology.…”

“…Soft news articles focusing for example on human interest stories might draw the attention more than hard news dealing with political issues (Henderson & Kitzinger, 1999;Vicsek, 2011;Vicsek & Gergely, 2011). A public that is interested in post-material issues might engage more with environmental issues of the GM media reportage, than publics which are of material orientation, such as the Hungarian public (Inglehart & Welzel, 2005;Karácsony, 2001).…”

“…As the diffusion of the media representation into media outlets was uneven, consumers of certain media outlets were able to receive even less information. The GM topic appeared in the Hungarian press almost exclusively in the form of hard news, which often engages members of the public less (Henderson & Kitzinger, 1999;Vicsek, 2011;Vicsek & Gergely, 2011).…”

“…A public that is interested in post-material issues might engage more with environmental issues of the GM media reportage, than publics which are of material orientation, such as the Hungarian public (Inglehart & Welzel, 2005;Karácsony, 2001). Particular kinds of new outlets might also reach different segments of the public (Henderson & Kitzinger, 1999;Vicsek, 2011;Vicsek & Gergely, 2011).…”

“…This happened in spite of the fact that the dominant meaning of the word plant in Hungarian is not in connection with food -thus if they had not heard about it in the media, they could have focused on other meanings of the word plant. The branding of the GM issue as a food issue can potentially lead to the mobilization of different analogous schemas, rhetoric, and experiences -than if it was associated with cure or industrial use (Hughes et al, 2008;Vicsek, 2011).…”