The Public Impact of Science in the Mass Media
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
/3> The Public Impact of Science in the Mass Media A Report on a Nation-wide Survey for the National Association of Science Writers <3s Suroey Research Center Institute for Social Research * The Um'oersi'tu of Michigan (958 THE PUBLIC IMPACT OF SCIENCE IN THE MASS MEDIA A Report on a Nation-wide Survey for the National Association of Science Writers Survey Research Center Institute for Social Research University of Michigan 1958 Copyright 1958 by the National Association of Science Writers, Inc. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study was sponsored by the National Association of Science Writers and supported by a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation. Assistance in administering the grant was provided by New York University. The research was conducted by the Survey Research Center as one of a series of studies in the (tanmunication and Influence Program, which is under the direction of Stephen B. Wit hey. The survey was planned in cooperation with the Surveys Committee of the National Association of Science Writers, Members of the Committee were: Professor Hillier Krieghbaum, Department of Journalism, New York University (Chairman); Alton Blakeslee, Science Reporter, Associated Press; Roland Berg, Science and Medical Editor, Look magazine; Martin Mann, Senior Editor, Popular Science Monthly; and Earl Ubell, Science Editor, New York Herald Tribune. Valuable comments and advice were offered by members of the Survey Research Center, including: Angus Campbell, Elizabeth Douvan, William A. Scott (now of the University of Colorado), Robert S. Weiss (now of the University of Chicago), and Stephen B. WIthey. The sample was selected by the Sampling Section, headed by Leslie Kish; members of the section most closely associated with the project were Irene Hess, John Takeshita, and C. Edwin lean. The interviewing was per• formed by the interviewers of the Field Section, Charles F. Cannell, Head; working closely with the study were Morris Axelrod and Lois L. Davis. The coding of the interviews was supervised by Charlotte C. Winter, Head, Coding Section. The machine tabulation of the data was supervised by Laurence F. Weiner, Assisting in the processing of the data were, successively, Kristine Rosenthal, Mary Ann Fisher, Phyllis Feldman, and Susan Blanchard. Throughout the study the secretarial work was performed by Joan Beatty. The study was directed and the report written by Robert C. Davis. April 1958 TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface 1 Chapter I The Mass Media and their Audiences 9 Chapter II Science Audiences of the Mass Media 39 Chapter III Science and the Newspaper Audience'..... 57 Chapter IV Science News and the Magazine, Radio and Television Audiences 86 Chapter 7 Science News: Forms and Channels 118 Chapter VI Science News: Skills 133 Chapter VII Science News: Motivations 157 Chapter VIII Science News and Attitudes about Science 179 Chapter IX In Conclusion 223 Appendix A Sampling Methods and Sampling Variability 226 Appendix B The Questionnaire 230 Appendix C Supplementary Tables •. 2li2 PREFACE Science News: Supply and Demand The scientific journals of the world pour forth research papers at the rate of twenty thousand a week. The science writer, as the middle man in the flow of communications, must select, condense, and translate from this fantastic deluge of information those items he is to transmit to the lay audiences of the mass media. In economic terms, it is not supply but demand that is the problem in the transaction. More precisely, it is demand that has been the unknown factor in the decision to market more or less of the science news commodity. Because demand has hitherto only been guessed at, other factors—some objective, like space limitations and financial considerations, some subjective, like an editor's feeling for "what people really want"—have played the major roles in determining. how much science has been presented in the mass media.* One of the major functions of the present study will be to assess the demand side of the equation—to measure the size of the science audiences of the major media, and to point out some of the factors which contribute to the consumption of science news. The amount of science news in the mass media has been infinitesimal in comparison to the volume of "raw" science information. One study of the content of daily newspapers revealed the following facts on the percentages of non-advertising space devoted to science news. Among 97 dailies examined for the period 1939-51, the space devoted to "education, science and philanthropy" was 5.01 per cent and 5.55 per cent for competitive and non-competitive papers respectively. Another sample of 26 dailies, taken in 1955? showed 7-3 per cent and 7*9 per cent of the space devoted to the same category of news for the two types of papers. Considering that education and philanthropy were included in the category, it seems safe to assume that science news constituted certainly less than 5 per cent of the space in the papers sampled. Furthermore, in the interval between the two periods of time, science coverage probably has-increased only very slightly, if at all.** # For the historical background of the problem see; H. Krieghbaum, American Newspaper Reporting of Science News (Kansas State College Bulletin, Vol. XXV, No. 5, I9hl), R. B. Nixon and R. L. Jones, "The content of non-competitive vs. competi• tive newspapers," Journalism Quarterly, 33 (1956), 299-3lii. 2 Another study of 29 papers made in 1938 found 1.2 per cent of the content was devoted to science primarily, but another k»S per cent dealt indirectly with science. A study of 130 papers for the period 1939-50 found only 0.6 per cent of the items were on science and inventions and 1.1 per cent on health and safety.* . Another study which sampled three Wisconsin papers and the New York Times in 1900-05 and 1950-55 showed ithat front page space devoted to science (broadly defined) increased only slightly in the fifty-year period and that the "play" given science news was only slightly more prominent in the more recent period. Furthermore, the study noted only a slight increase in the level of reading difficulty in the half-century span."** Some indication of the volume of. science news sent over a large news service trunk line and what happens to it before it reaches the reader may be infer• red from another study. Comparing sample weeks in 1950-51 with 1952-53, on AP news coming into Wisconsin, it was found that only 1.8 per cent and 0.9 per cent of the total trunk news concerned "science and inventions" during the two sample periods. This was cut for the state wire to 1.0 per cent and 0.06 per cent. The carry-over from the trunk to the Wisconsin AP wire was 37 per cent of the stories and 10 per cent of the wordage in 1950-5lj^and 9 per cent of the stories and 3 per cent of the wordage in 1952-53.*^ A study of fifty managing editors made in 1950 revealed generally positive attitudes toward science news. The editors reported that science coverage in their papers had increased during the preceding ten years. They reported that only limitation of space prevented them from using more science items. It seems, despite the estimates of editors that they were using more science news, that science coverage has remained a small part of total news content. To be sure, all these studies were made before the American-Soviet science race was intensified by. the launching of the Sputniks. A series of content analysis studies following the Sputnik crisis will have to be made before we can assess the permanence of the changes that seem to have occurred in science coverage following this dramatic event. Science news in magazines is harder to estimate. However, some inferences can be made from the general post-war trend .in this medium. A study of the period \9k6-$k found that magazine circulation increased, but more important, the circulation of "high-brow" magazines doubled while the "middle-brow" maga• zines increased by about half and the "low brow" magazines remained about the * E. Ubell, "Covering the News of Science," American Scientist, h5 U957), 330A-35OA. J. M. Speiller, A comparative case study of science news coverage in selected newspapers, 1900-1905, 1950-55, (MA thesis, University of Wisconsin, 1956). S. M. Cutlip, "Content and flow of AP news: From trunk to TTS- to reader," Journalism Quarterly, 31 (19510* U3k~kk6* •s-JHr-s H. Krieghbaum, Report on the NASW survey of the attitudes of managing editors toward science writing (195l). 3 same. It was noted that educated, urban readership was up and that there was reason to believe that television was taking over the "low brow," audience. Changes in the content and function of magazines seemed to show that the recreation-entertainment function was taken over by television, while maga• zines tended to focus more on utilitarian functions, especially those related to leisure, food, health, children and even politics and business.* If these trends are accurately assessed, the prospect of science in maga• zines seems rather bright, especially if the shift of the entertainment function to television, with the concomitant rise of information content in magazines, develops into a firm trend. Television, both in terms of content and of listener response, is clearly the leader in the entertainment field. The available studies show that about three-quarters of program time is devoted to entertainment and we shall see later that about three-quarters of our sample name television as their main media source of entertainment. But what of science on television? One study of program content in New York showed that only 0.3 per cent of the time during a sample week in 1951 was devoted to science.