In this assignment you will look at how a scientific controversy was portrayed in the mass media, what impressions a general reader would have gained (about the controversy and about science in general) and how the controversy played out over time. In order to do this, you will take advantage of the back issues of newspapers and magazines which are available (and fully searchable) on the Web. Look at the way the story was presented over time. What sources were quoted? What message was given to the public? How did the message change over time (if at all)? Were there any key moments in which coverage of the story changed significantly (tipping points)? What conclusions can you draw not only from how the science was presented, but from the public reaction? Paper Structure: Start out with a brief (one paragraph) summary of the conflict. You should do some basic research to familiarize yourself with the con troversy before you start. Go back and look at the scientific paper(s) that prompted the stories and explain what they actually said. Your next paragraph should briefly explain your methodology. Explain exactly what sources you used, what search terms you employed, and the time frame you looked at. Once you have that out of the way, present your results. Generally speaking, a chronological approach will be best. Start out with the earliest references to the conflict you can find, move through the heart of the conflict and finally to its resolution, continually referencing the stories you found. Try to be aware of any changes in the way the story is being treated, whether in the tone of the stories or in the nature of the experts being quoted. Finally, a closing paragraph should bring together all your conclusions and summarize your findings about the way in which the story was covered, what message was given to the public, and what (if any) impact there might have been on the broader view of science. The final paper should be 1000 – 1250 words (4-5 pages, double-spaced) (not counting references) Hints: Rather than simply analyzing what the Globe and Mail had to say, you might find it instructive to compare several newspapers from different countries, or two different newspapers from the same country, to see how/if the story was being covered differently. If you do see any differences, can you explain why? (Remember: science doesn’t take place in a vacuum, so the social considerations always affect how science is done and understood.) You might also compare how a mass- market source like a newspaper or magazine covered the story compared with the approach of a more specialist source of information like a science magazine or journal. Look for how the story was covered by the stakeholders (those actually affected by the controversy) as well as by the larger media. If you are dealing with a longer-term controversy (the controversy over CFCs, for example) look at how the story was treated over a longer period of time, looking for any significant changes in tone or approach. And always keep an eye out for anyone who might have ulterior motives. The Controversies (choose one): The Dover Intelligent Design Trial of 2005 The Ozone Hole Debate (and the broader debate over banning CFCs) The Acid Rain Debate The first test-tube baby Scientists try to build artificial organs using stem cells and 3D printers (February 2013) Cold Fusion The Vaccination-Autism Debate The Demotion of Pluto Scientists create a hybrid, air-transmitted bird flu (May, 2013)
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]