首页> 外文期刊>Social science and medicine >Different frames, different fears: communicating about chlorinated drinking water and cancer in the Canadian media.
【24h】

Different frames, different fears: communicating about chlorinated drinking water and cancer in the Canadian media.

机译:不同的框架,不同的恐惧:在加拿大媒体中传达有关氯化饮用水和癌症的信息。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Risk issues become complicated when scientific evidence concerning a potential environmental exposure is equivocal; particularly when many argue that the public health benefits of a policy action outweigh any potential negative health effects. Chlorinated drinking water, and chlorinated disinfection byproducts (CDBPs) that are formed during the disinfection process, represent a useful case-study for examining these complications. We conduct a media analysis of chlorinated drinking water stories in the Canadian print media from 1977 to 2000. We examine media presentations of science compared to framings by scientists, regulators, the chlorine industry, water utility representatives, and non-governmental organizations of the CDBP issue based on key informant interviews. We argue that there are two main framings of the debate, each of which are powerful in constructing risk perceptions. On the one hand, many frame the debate as a 'voluntary' risk: we choose chlorine disinfection to protect against microbial risks with a possible adverse consequence of that protection. On the other hand, others frame the issue as an 'involuntary' risk: chlorine disinfection was a 'choice' imposed by public health and water utility officials; a choice that carries a potential cancer risk, and alternative disinfection technologies are advocated. We demonstrate these different frames by examining metaphorical constructs of water, chlorine and cancer contained within them.
机译:当关于潜在环境暴露的科学证据含糊不清时,风险问题变得复杂;尤其是当许多人认为政策行动对公共健康的好处超过任何潜在的负面健康影响时。消毒过程中形成的氯化饮用水和氯化消毒副产物(CDBP)是检查这些并发症的有用案例研究。我们对1977年至2000年加拿大印刷媒体中的氯化饮用水故事进行了媒体分析。我们比较了科学家,监管机构,制氯行业,水务公司代表和CDBP的非政府组织对科学媒体的报道与取景。基于关键线人访谈的问题。我们认为,辩论有两个主要框架,每个框架在建立风险认知方面都很有力。一方面,许多人将辩论形容为“自愿”风险:我们选择氯消毒来防止微生物风险,这种危害可能会带来不利影响。另一方面,其他人则将此问题归结为“非自愿”风险:氯消毒是公共卫生和自来水公司官员施加的“选择”。有潜在癌症风险的选择,并提倡使用替代消毒技术。我们通过检查其中包含的水,氯和癌症的隐喻结构来证明这些不同的框架。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号