Science and Medical Coverage in the Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post

Abstract

A content analysis of the science, medical, and environmental news reported in the Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post in biennial periods from 1989 to 1995 explored seven hypotheses about science reporting, news selection, and writing that were derived from the qualitatively based literature. Outcome variables were the percentage of news stories that are generated by events or are episodically generated, of news stories that are generated by science issues, of news stories with an embedded human interest component, of news stories with an embedded educational/informative component, of conflicts between scientists embedded as a writing motif, of news stories with a focus on pioneer science, and of news stories with a focus on textbook science. Five of the seven hypotheses with regard to the overall frequencies of science-reporting motifs within both newspapers were rejected. Expected qualitative patterns received only partial and equivocal support within the time periods surveyed. The findings suggest that science journalism performance, if assessed over longer periods of time, may vary from some qualitative case-study presumptions. Case studies of science news may not reflect a news organization's overall reporting, editing, and news selection trends, which appear to be more broadly prudent and responsible within the newspapers surveyed than some previous scholarship suggests.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 16 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.