News Media Coverage and the Construction of Public Health Problems

劳拉卡彭特范德比尔特大学对健康的威胁很多，但只有一些被公众和政策制定者视为严重问题。学者们之前已经探索了国家、活动家和医疗行为者如何影响与健康相关的公共问题的构建，但目前还没有整合新闻专业人员的学术模型。决定要报道哪些问题以及如何报道。本项目通过比较1985年至2007年美国、英国和加拿大实施的女性生殖器切割（FGC）和男性割礼（MC）的争议，调查记者和主要利益相关者有选择地对健康相关问题提出问题和作出回应的方式。它们是否应该被视为健康、人权、性别压迫或宗教/文化认同的问题，人们对此进行了激烈的辩论。具体来说，本研究的问题是：不同利益相关者的地位以及他们之间的联盟如何影响辩论过程和政策结果？哪些因素影响了利益相关者？问题的框架和那些框架？有效性?新闻媒体实践如何塑造对问题、利益相关者和框架的报道？更广泛的社会/历史背景在哪些方面影响了这些过程？将使用基础理论技术收集和分析三种类型的数据：活动家、医疗、宗教和其他利益攸关方团体制作的材料（例如，新闻稿、小册子）；国家和区域报纸和新闻杂志的报道；并采访记者、编辑、活动人士、医学协会领导人和媒体联络员以及其他关键行为者。这个项目的知识价值包括对社会问题、卫生和医学、新闻和社会运动的研究文献的贡献。这项研究将揭示理论上重要但很少研究的失败问题。领域扩张，即关注一个问题的积极分子试图利用类似的成功问题。这项研究还将有助于描述用医学术语（即医学化）定义问题的原因和后果。该项目将通过扩大记者、活动家、国家和医疗行为者为构建与健康相关的公共问题和政策做出贡献的方式的知识，产生更广泛的影响。它还将在记者和利益攸关方之间产生更有效的沟通和公共政策参与；为三个国家正在进行的关于MC和FGC的辩论提供信息，同时阐明当地的性别、种族/民族、移民和宗教政治；并提供解决过度医疗化问题的工具。的社会。为研究生提供学术培训机会。

SES-0816678Laura CarpenterVanderbilt UniversityMany threats to health exist, but only some are treated as serious problems by the public and policy makers. Scholars have previously explored how state, activists, and medical actors influence the construction of health-related public problems, but there are currently no scholarly models that integrate news professionals? decisions about which issues to cover and how. This project investigates the ways journalists and key stakeholders selectively problematize and respond to health-related issues, by comparing the controversies over female genital cutting (FGC) and male circumcision (MC) as practiced in the United States, Great Britain, and Canada, from 1985-2007. Whether they should be viewed as issues of health, human rights, gender oppression, or religious/cultural identity is hotly debated. Specifically, this study asks: How does the status of different stakeholders, and alliances among them, affect debate processes and policy outcomes? What factors influenced stakeholders? framing of the issues and those frames? effectiveness? How do news media practices shape the coverage of issues, stakeholders, and frames? In what ways did the broader social/historical context affect these processes? Three types of data will be gathered and analyzed using grounded theory techniques: materials produced by activist, medical, religious, and other stakeholder groups (e.g., press releases, brochures); accounts from national and regional newspapers and news magazines; and interviews with journalists, editors, activists, medical association leaders and media liaisons, and other key actors. The intellectual merits of this project include contributions to the research literature on social problems, health and medicine, journalism, and social movements. The research will shed light on the theoretically important but rarely studied matter of ?failed? domain expansion, whereby activists concerned with one issue attempt to capitalize on the success of a similar, successful issue. The study also will help to delineate the causes and consequences of defining problems in medical terms (i.e., medicalization). The project will have a broader impact by expanding knowledge of the ways journalists, activists, state, and medical actors contribute to the construction of health-related public problems and policies. It will also produce more effective communication among, and public-policy engagement by, journalists and stakeholders; inform ongoing debates around MC and FGC in the three nations while illuminating local politics of gender, race/ethnicity, immigration, and religion; and provide tools for addressing concern about the ?over-medicalization? of society. Scholarly training opportunities for graduate students will also be provided.