Science Journalism and Development in Kenya: A Content Analysis of Daily Nation's 'Horizon' Coverage of Biotechnology (GMOs) Issues

Abstract

Moving into the 2151 century. science has become an increasing public business and we are witnessing more space devoted to science issues in the mainstream media. More and more often now. research projects and findings are received and scrutinised not only within but also outside scientific journals and committees.

This places the media in a unique position with regard to scientific coverage. The media is often asking questions such as; What is new, what is useful and important research, what sort of research is in the public interest? The mass media have therefore become an arena for legitimisation of science and a forum for mediating the relations between science and the rest of the society. The public image of science and popular interpretations may also influence science itself, for instance, its choices of research subjects and areas in which it wants to invest its money.

Considered by the larger public to be operating in an ivory tower, science has been in the middle of a struggle for social prestige and resources. The public expectations placed on science are quite varied and often contradictory. The role of science is perhaps most clearly visible when the media debate is about different kinds of social problems. Scientists may play an important role in the definition of social problems, not only in their capacity as creators of knowledge but also as interpreters, witnesses, investigators of social problems.

Environmental issues are an example of social problems which science and scientists have an exceptionally important role in addressing, and currently Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) (Sundqvst 1991; Yearley, 1991; Zepr, 1994). Hans-Peter (1994) has identified two different ways 6fdealing with scientific and research results in journalism. He points out that from a science-centered point

of view, the task of journalism is to convey to the general public information about research results in an accurate, understandable and as interesting way as possible. The mass mediated public sphere has become an important area for the legitimating of science. The institution of science has at least to some extent, become dependent on the images and discourses produced and circulated in the mass media.

Ongoing discussions on the role and place of GMOs by the public are reflections of this development. It seems that scientific organizations have become increasingly worried about the way in which the media have treated these issues.

The art of managing visibility is also becoming a daily routine for scientists working in different fields and institutional locations. University departments and research institutions/ institutes arrange courses for researchers on how to write popular papers, how to prepare a press release or how to appear on television. Although ten seconds in prime time news is not perhaps better than one peer-reviewed article in a scientific ranking, some might argue that the old slogan 'publish or perish' has transformed into 'be seen in public or perish' (Valivorrnoen, 1993).

Publicity by the media as far as science research findings are concerned, been described as not only the "lifeblood" of research funding but also the bridge between scientific research findings and public understanding of these. This study therefore looks at how the people left with this enormous task have handled this responsibility