Cargando…
Contrasting academic and lay press print coverage of the 2013-2016 Ebola Virus Disease outbreak
Under a traditional paradigm, only those with the expected background knowledge consume academic literature. The lay press, as well as government and non-government agencies, play a complementary role of extracting findings of high interest or importance and translating them for general viewing. The...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5480889/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28640889 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179356 |
_version_ | 1783245320949334016 |
---|---|
author | Kieh, Mark D. Cho, Elim M. Myles, Ian A. |
author_facet | Kieh, Mark D. Cho, Elim M. Myles, Ian A. |
author_sort | Kieh, Mark D. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Under a traditional paradigm, only those with the expected background knowledge consume academic literature. The lay press, as well as government and non-government agencies, play a complementary role of extracting findings of high interest or importance and translating them for general viewing. The need for accurate reporting and public advising is paramount when attempting to tackle epidemic outbreaks through behavior change. Yet, public trust in media outlets is at a historic low. The Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication (CERC) model for media reporting on public health emergencies was established in 2005 and has subsequently been used to analyze media reporting on outbreaks of influenza and measles as well as smoking habits and medication compliance. However, no media analysis had yet been performed on the 2013–2016 Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) outbreak. This study compared the EVD information relayed by lay press sources with general review articles in the academic literature through a mixed-methods analysis. These findings suggest that comprehensive review articles could not serve as a source to clarify and contextualize the uncertainties around the EVD outbreak, perhaps due to adherence to technical accuracy at the expense of clarity within the context of outbreak conditions. This finding does not imply inferiority of the academic literature, nor does it draw direct causation between confusion in review articles and public misunderstanding. Given the erosion of the barriers siloing academia, combined with the demands of today’s fast-paced media environment, contemporary researchers should realize that no study is outside the public forum and to therefore consider shifting the paradigm to take personal responsibility in the process of accurately translating their scientific words into public policy actions to best serve as a source of clarity. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5480889 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-54808892017-07-05 Contrasting academic and lay press print coverage of the 2013-2016 Ebola Virus Disease outbreak Kieh, Mark D. Cho, Elim M. Myles, Ian A. PLoS One Research Article Under a traditional paradigm, only those with the expected background knowledge consume academic literature. The lay press, as well as government and non-government agencies, play a complementary role of extracting findings of high interest or importance and translating them for general viewing. The need for accurate reporting and public advising is paramount when attempting to tackle epidemic outbreaks through behavior change. Yet, public trust in media outlets is at a historic low. The Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication (CERC) model for media reporting on public health emergencies was established in 2005 and has subsequently been used to analyze media reporting on outbreaks of influenza and measles as well as smoking habits and medication compliance. However, no media analysis had yet been performed on the 2013–2016 Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) outbreak. This study compared the EVD information relayed by lay press sources with general review articles in the academic literature through a mixed-methods analysis. These findings suggest that comprehensive review articles could not serve as a source to clarify and contextualize the uncertainties around the EVD outbreak, perhaps due to adherence to technical accuracy at the expense of clarity within the context of outbreak conditions. This finding does not imply inferiority of the academic literature, nor does it draw direct causation between confusion in review articles and public misunderstanding. Given the erosion of the barriers siloing academia, combined with the demands of today’s fast-paced media environment, contemporary researchers should realize that no study is outside the public forum and to therefore consider shifting the paradigm to take personal responsibility in the process of accurately translating their scientific words into public policy actions to best serve as a source of clarity. Public Library of Science 2017-06-22 /pmc/articles/PMC5480889/ /pubmed/28640889 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179356 Text en https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ This is an open access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) public domain dedication. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Kieh, Mark D. Cho, Elim M. Myles, Ian A. Contrasting academic and lay press print coverage of the 2013-2016 Ebola Virus Disease outbreak |
title | Contrasting academic and lay press print coverage of the 2013-2016 Ebola Virus Disease outbreak |
title_full | Contrasting academic and lay press print coverage of the 2013-2016 Ebola Virus Disease outbreak |
title_fullStr | Contrasting academic and lay press print coverage of the 2013-2016 Ebola Virus Disease outbreak |
title_full_unstemmed | Contrasting academic and lay press print coverage of the 2013-2016 Ebola Virus Disease outbreak |
title_short | Contrasting academic and lay press print coverage of the 2013-2016 Ebola Virus Disease outbreak |
title_sort | contrasting academic and lay press print coverage of the 2013-2016 ebola virus disease outbreak |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5480889/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28640889 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179356 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kiehmarkd contrastingacademicandlaypressprintcoverageofthe20132016ebolavirusdiseaseoutbreak AT choelimm contrastingacademicandlaypressprintcoverageofthe20132016ebolavirusdiseaseoutbreak AT mylesiana contrastingacademicandlaypressprintcoverageofthe20132016ebolavirusdiseaseoutbreak |