SSOAR Logo
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • English 
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • Login
SSOAR ▼
  • Home
  • About SSOAR
  • Guidelines
  • Publishing in SSOAR
  • Cooperating with SSOAR
    • Cooperation models
    • Delivery routes and formats
    • Projects
  • Cooperation partners
    • Information about cooperation partners
  • Information
    • Possibilities of taking the Green Road
    • Grant of Licences
    • Download additional information
  • Operational concept
Browse and search Add new document OAI-PMH interface
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Download PDF
Download full text

(74.87Kb)

Citation Suggestion

Please use the following Persistent Identifier (PID) to cite this document:
https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-224106

Exports for your reference manager

Bibtex export
Endnote export

Display Statistics
Share
  • Share via E-Mail E-Mail
  • Share via Facebook Facebook
  • Share via Bluesky Bluesky
  • Share via Reddit reddit
  • Share via Linkedin LinkedIn
  • Share via XING XING

Beneficial or biohazard? How the media frame biosolids

[journal article]

Goodman, J. Robyn
Goodman, Brett P.

Abstract

This study looked at how the media framed biosolids, or treated sewage sludge, from 1994 to 2004 by analyzing the 13 media frames found in 286 biosolid-related articles from newspapers in Florida, Virginia, and California. The researchers found the articl... view more

This study looked at how the media framed biosolids, or treated sewage sludge, from 1994 to 2004 by analyzing the 13 media frames found in 286 biosolid-related articles from newspapers in Florida, Virginia, and California. The researchers found the articles framed biosolids as a regulatory or legal issue most often, and most of the frames’ tones were neutral (1,958). However, negative tone (507) happened three times more often than positive tone (149), and environmental, management, and public nuisance framing tended to be more negative than any of the other frames. Neither the frames themselves nor the tones had statistically significant changes over the past decade. Regarding the sources used in the stories, the most frequent source was local government officials, which were used twice as frequently as any other source, followed by corporations (16 percent) and citizens (14 percent). These findings should help biosolid producers and officials in developing a media strategy that is proactive toward shaping public opinion rather than reactive to an issue that makes its way to the media and spurs public concern.... view less

Document language
English

Publication Year
2006

Page/Pages
p. 359-375

Journal
Public Understanding of Science, 15 (2006) 3

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662506062468

Status
Postprint; peer reviewed

Licence
PEER Licence Agreement (applicable only to documents from PEER project)


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Legal notices  |  Operational concept  |  Privacy policy
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.
 

 


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Legal notices  |  Operational concept  |  Privacy policy
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.