How the Media Influences the Public Perception of Science Essay Example

observed to continue beyond one person.

On the 6th of April 2006, there was a scare regarding the bird flu virus, a swan was found dead in a village in Scotland. Officials from Scotland started testing the swan for bird flu and later on that week it was confirmed that the swan did die of bird flu. Immediately, the media started covering the story and began creating a negative picture. I analysed the story written by a tabloid newspaper and a broadsheet with the intention to find out which type of newspaper exaggerates and alters the public’s perception of a scientific topic like the bird flu.

The tabloid newspaper is the Sun and the broadsheet newspaper is the Times. Firstly I will analyse the story written by the Sun, this tabloid covered the same story as the Times and therefore we can find out their intentions. The Sun had the following bold headline “Deadly strain confirmed”, I can clearly see from the start that they are trying to create a scare in the public and capture the reader’s attention very fast, this is because they don’t tell you what deadly strain they are talking about, if I were to see this in a newspaper lying around I would pick it up because it already got me worried and caught my attention.

This has made me think, are they trying to inform the reader or just trying to sell their story? You only learn what the deadly strain is after you read paragraph 1 so this proves my point. On the 3rd paragraph the Sun states the following “the swan had the strain which can be fatal to humans.

” Instead of just using “the swan had the H5N1 strain” the Sun chooses to create more of an impact by using the word “fatal” and implying it to humans. This makes the beginning of the article to cause fear, evoke an element of alarm and perhaps imply that the readers should be fearful for their own health.

The article also mentions experts rushing to the scene to carry out tests, and this portraits a feeling of urgency. The readers are told “Confirmation of the H5N1 virus means a massive public protection operation will swing into action, this could include people having to leave their homes and a restriction on where they can travel. ” the Sun is again creating scenarios that strike at the heart of what its reader’s value, their homes and their freedom to travel, and reinforcing the intended tone of alarm and trepidation.

Even though the Sun informs the reader of the current happenings the story reinforces their headline which was intended to cause fear and death. The Guardian, however, takes a different approach than the Sun; their headline seems to be more informative and less attractive. In contrast to the Sun, their headline states the following “Swan had lethal flu virus” even though they used a strong adjective like “lethal” their headline was way more informative than the Sun. However it is still, in my opinion, creating a scare mongering feeling.

But in a way both newspapers are right to state that the H5N1 is a lethal virus. The Guardian quotes specific experts by their names and their professional position and this creates an impression of credibility. Where the Governments chief veterinary officer

is quoted as saying, “I have every confidence…,” or a professor of virology saying, “…still a big step away from a domestic chicken or even a human being infected,” both quotes intending to create a feeling of security and confidence in the authorities to handle the outbreak.

It also mentions, “The H5N1 strain has killed more than 100 people, mostly Asian, since 2003,” but then it balances this statement with, “However, it has not mutated to be able to transfer between humans. ” The entire article is well balanced without emotive language and with a tone which is focused to create a feeling of reassurance to the reader by setting out the contingency plans. For example “Speaking at press conference in Edinburgh Ross Finnie, Scotland's minister for environment and rural development, said: "We have confirmed that it is regrettably an H5N1 strain. By printing the comment from Scotland’s minister which said regrettably, the Guardian reassures the reader that they too are worried. Instead of using statistics to create that scare mongering picture, they use statistics to show what the government is doing. For example “Authorities have set up a protection zone around Cellardyke, with a minimum radius of 1. 8 miles (3km), as well as a surveillance zone of six miles.

Cars going in and out of the village were stopped by police and motorists were asked if they were carrying poultry. ” They also include a contact number in case anyone found dead birds “She said anyone who found a dead swan, duck or goose, or three or more dead wild or garden birds together, should contact the Defra helpline on 08459 335577. ” In my

opinion, The Guardian has designated an enormous amount of space to the bird flu and this clearly shows it isn’t underplaying the seriousness of the situation.

What it has done is to document all the available facts in a clear unemotional approach which suggests that by giving the readers all existing knowledge they will be intelligent enough to form their own opinions. The Sun on the other hand, talks of roadblocks, the impact it could have on domestic birds and the incompetence of the various agencies involved, all contributing to the inference that bird flu is going to have a major impact on the man in the street.

But it is fair to say both of the articles sort of create a scare mongering picture but it does not mislead you in any way. It tells the facts, only in a different way, the Sun is trying to sell the story more but the Guardian is trying to inform the reader more. Bibliography http://www. guardian. co. uk/society/2006/apr/06/health. birdflu3? INTCMP=SRCH http://www. thesun. co. uk/sol/homepage/news/43916/Deadly-strain-confirmed. html Both of these were used in 01/02/12 Class notes, Peter Ellis 2012