Download the eBook (8.25 MB) - ECREA Thematic Sections

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Diversity of Journalisms. Proceedings of ECREA/CICOM Conference, Pamplona, 4-5 July 2011 In January and February 2010, during which time the WHO and the European Commission were criticized for having yielded to lobbying from the pharmaceutical industry, the story was no longer interesting to the Portuguese press. It was followed at a distance, and almost without first page references. From a clinical standpoint, the periods of stress were quite different. The peak of infection occurred in the last fortnight of November, a period during which more than twenty thousand people were infected each week. December and January were the months in which more people died of the disease. As suggested, the predominant news frames varied throughout the news coverage. In April 2009, the newspaper echoed the interpretive packages that we have designated as “Description of the epidemiology of the virus” and “Battle to define the disease designation.” From May to September, the newspaper reported under the frames “Government statements appealing to normalcy”, “Impacts on the economy and everyday life”, and occasionally “Accusations of poor risk management”. In October and December, the frame “Government statements appealing to normalcy” was still predominant, but there was more information on the theme of “Vaccination and resistance to vaccination.” From January to August 2010, one can easily find “Accusations of poor risk management” and “Accusations of media hysteria”, although health officials struggled to show how the government was in control. In August, the WHO declared the end of the pandemic. By then, the predominant interpretive package was again “Accusations of poor risk management”. In a way, the newspaper was slow to calling into question the assumptions official authorities had chosen to define the issue, confirming yet again the decisive influence of officials with scientific authority in the initial framing of controversial health topics (Traquina, Cabrera, Ponte and Santos, 2001). At least one section of the newspaper, however, reported otherwise. Table 2 represents the monthly publication of humorous approaches to the subject of swine flu. 20 cartoons (some of which purchased abroad), 7 strips, 19 photomontages and 60 texts were published during the sampling period. The timing of the address of swine flu in humorous items did not escape the pattern established by the news sections, as expected. After all, the humour is generated by the mockery of current affairs. Nevertheless, the use of comedy frames was different from the rest of the publication. Humour as a place of rebellion is more effective as a device to critique. The absurd or the unreal permit claims that do not demand auxiliary evidence, as is required by the professional standards of journalists. Thorough factual checks and the search for witnesses or documents proving the allegations are unnecessary. Naturally, one runs the risk of libel or of injustice to public figures, but at the same time a healthy area of critique is fostered. One could assume that its value to the newspaper is precisely the indiscipline it resonates. Since the beginning of the swine flu case, newspaper humorists downplayed the severity of the threat and compared it to previous health panics such as the outbreak of SARS in 2003 and the avian influenza in 2005. For instance, the last cartoon of our 288
Diversity of Journalisms. Proceedings of ECREA/CICOM Conference, Pamplona, 4-5 July 2011 sample, published in late August 2010, places the flu in a circular motion, in which every health threat is just a step on the way to the next big scare. The representation of the pandemic as just one more health problem denies its severity and raises the debate to the level of the responsibilities of those involved in its public build-up. 289
Page 1 and 2:
diversityof journalisms (cicom+ecre
Page 3 and 4:
Servicio de Publicaciones de la Uni
Page 5 and 6:
Getting Personal: Personification v
Page 7 and 8:
Tradition and Innovation in Online
Page 9 and 10:
Diversity of Journalisms. Proceedin
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238: Diversity of Journalisms. Proceedin
Page 287: Diversity of Journalisms. Proceedin
Page 339 and 340:
Page 341 and 342:
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Page 349 and 350:
Page 351 and 352:
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
Page 357 and 358:
Page 359 and 360:
Page 361 and 362:
Page 363 and 364:
Page 365 and 366:
Page 367 and 368:
Page 369 and 370:
Page 371 and 372:
Page 373 and 374:
Page 375 and 376:
Page 377 and 378:
Page 379 and 380:
Page 381 and 382:
Page 383 and 384:
Page 385 and 386:
Page 387 and 388:
Page 389 and 390:
Page 391 and 392:
Page 393 and 394:
Page 395 and 396:
Page 397 and 398:
Page 399 and 400:
Page 401 and 402:
Page 403 and 404:
Page 405 and 406:
Page 407 and 408:
Page 409 and 410:
Page 411 and 412:
Page 413 and 414:
Page 415 and 416:
Page 417 and 418:
Page 419 and 420:
Page 421 and 422:
Page 423 and 424:
Page 425 and 426:
Page 427 and 428:
Page 429 and 430:
Page 431 and 432:
Page 433 and 434:
Page 435 and 436:
Page 437 and 438:
Page 439 and 440:
Page 441 and 442:
Page 443 and 444:
Page 445 and 446:
Page 447 and 448:
Page 449 and 450:
Page 451 and 452:
Page 453 and 454:
Page 455 and 456:
Page 457 and 458:
Page 459 and 460:
Page 461 and 462:
show all

Download the eBook (8.25 MB) - ECREA Thematic Sections

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?