Quick
Search: 
 
advanced search
 GSW Home    GeoRef Home    My GSW Alerts    Contact GSW    About GSW    Journals List    Help 
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America Email Content Delivery
JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America; December 1982; v. 72; no. 6B; p. S19-S28
© 1982 Seismological Society of America
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by TURNER, R. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

Media in crisis: Blowing hot and cold

RALPH H. TURNER

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90024

Abstract

A 3-yr content analysis of all items dealing with earthquakes in six major Los Angeles newspapers and a review of television and radio treatment of earthquake topics in the same period, coupled with periodic surveys of popular understanding and attitudes toward the earthquake threat following announcement of the southern California uplift (Palmdale Bulge), lead to the identification of four media problems that contributed to the often erratic treatment of earthquake threat. First is the problem of newsworthiness, determining when and how to feature discussions of the continuing earthquake threat in the absence of either dramatic events or mobilized public controversy. Second is the problem of finding sources to provide a steady flow of material for use in preparing news items, in the absence of well-organized interest groups, especially those concerned with individual, household, and neighborhood earthquake preparedness. Third is the dilemma of how to balance the needs for alarm and reassurance, shocking people out of lethargy into action on the one hand versus trying to minimize unproductive anxiety and community disruption on the other hand. The fourth problem is communicating science when nonscientific world views are prevalent and merged to the point of confusion with scientific world views in popular thinking.







JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2009 by Seismological Society of America