Difference between revisions of "Armon2017"
SaulAlbert (talk | contribs) |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BibEntry | {{BibEntry | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
| − | |Author(s)= | + | |Author(s)=Rony Armon; Ayelet Baram-Tsabari |
| − | |Title=Our findings, | + | |Title=Our findings, my method: Framing science in televised interviews |
|Tag(s)=EMCA; television; conversation analysis; framing; media and science; narrative; science experts; television | |Tag(s)=EMCA; television; conversation analysis; framing; media and science; narrative; science experts; television | ||
| − | |Key= | + | |Key=Armon2017 |
| − | + | |Year=2017 | |
| − | |Year= | + | |Language=English |
| − | | | ||
|Journal=Public Understanding of Science | |Journal=Public Understanding of Science | ||
| − | |URL=http:// | + | |Volume=26 |
| + | |Number=8 | ||
| + | |Pages=986–1002 | ||
| + | |URL=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0963662516648532 | ||
|DOI=10.1177/0963662516648532 | |DOI=10.1177/0963662516648532 | ||
| − | |Abstract=The | + | |Abstract=The public communication of science and technology largely depends on its framing in the news media, but scientists’ role in this process has only been explored indirectly. This study focuses on storied accounts told by scientists when asked to present their research or provide expert advice in the course of a news interview. A total of 150 items from a current affairs talk show broadcast in the Israeli media were explored through a methodology combining narrative and conversation analysis. Using the concept of framing as originally proposed by Erving Goffman, we show that researchers use personal accounts as a way of reframing news stories introduced by the program hosts. Elements of method and rationale, which are usually considered technical and are shunned in journalistic reports, emerged as a crucial element in the accounts that experts themselves provided. The implications for framing research and science communication training are discussed. |
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 11:32, 28 December 2019
| Armon2017 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Armon2017 |
| Author(s) | Rony Armon, Ayelet Baram-Tsabari |
| Title | Our findings, my method: Framing science in televised interviews |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, television, conversation analysis, framing, media and science, narrative, science experts, television |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2017 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Public Understanding of Science |
| Volume | 26 |
| Number | 8 |
| Pages | 986–1002 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1177/0963662516648532 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
The public communication of science and technology largely depends on its framing in the news media, but scientists’ role in this process has only been explored indirectly. This study focuses on storied accounts told by scientists when asked to present their research or provide expert advice in the course of a news interview. A total of 150 items from a current affairs talk show broadcast in the Israeli media were explored through a methodology combining narrative and conversation analysis. Using the concept of framing as originally proposed by Erving Goffman, we show that researchers use personal accounts as a way of reframing news stories introduced by the program hosts. Elements of method and rationale, which are usually considered technical and are shunned in journalistic reports, emerged as a crucial element in the accounts that experts themselves provided. The implications for framing research and science communication training are discussed.
Notes
