Alan Petersen

The Framing of Nanotechnologies in the British Newspaper Press

This article investigates how developments in nanotechnology were framed in the British national newspaper press during a formative period in their rising public salience. Specifically, an intervention by Prince Charles in April 2003 is shown to have acted as the principal catalyst for much of the ensuing newspaper reporting over the next fifteen months. This study, in taking as its focus the operation of specific news frames, identifies a range of factors that shaped the initial terms of the subsequent debate (between both advocates and critics of nanotechnology) from one newspaper to the next during this period. The analysis suggests that the involvement of a celebrity may play a crucial role in enhancing the newsworthiness of an issue and influencing its subsequent framing in the newspaper press.

Research on Men and Masculinities Some Implications of Recent Theory for Future Work

This article offers some reflections on the challenges posed by recent trends in social theory to the field of masculinity studies. The postmodern/poststructural turn in theory has led to a reappraisal of basic concepts in many fields of research and opened up new areas for investigation. The article outlines the relevance of this work for masculinity studies and draws some implications for the future development of the field. If scholars are to effectively challenge the power relations of gender, race, and sexuality, it is important that they critically examine the discursive frameworks that shape the fabrication of concepts, the definition of problems, and the formulation of research questions. The article concludes by proposing a revised and broadened agenda for research on men and masculinities, which pays greater attention to the politics of knowledge and makes greater use of historical methods to analyze power relations and the social constructions of masculine identity and the male body.

The New Genetics and the Public's Health

I welcomed the opportunity to review this book, which claims to be unique in its approach to the issue of genetics and its impact on the public health. Rather than focusing on medical genetics, preventative medicine or bioethics, the book takes a sociocultural approach. The authors set out to address the implications of the new genetics for public health practice and development by tackling five themes: risk and decision-making; the nature/culture dichotomy; anticipated new gene therapies; the role of the media in framing the debate; and the logic of the market. They attempt to examine the ways in which conceptions of health, disease and normality have been reshaped by politico-economic and global issues. These issues are examined by looking at the cultural context in which public health genetics is placed. This is then related to the impact this has upon the individual or ‘self’. Although there is an attempt to link the chapters, in reality they can be considered as a series of independent essays. Petersen, who has written the lion’s share of the book, introduces the ‘new genetics’ by saying it is a contested term that is widely used but poorly defined. He presents a range of definitions for the new genetics that he finds unacceptable. His main concern is that authors outline specific aims or outcomes of the genetic technologies rather than presenting a definition. Petersen offers his own interpretation, arguing that there is very little to distinguish the ‘new genetics’ from the ‘old eugenics’ because, in the most general terms, both are concerned with ‘human betterment’. Eugenics, he argues, was supported by the state’s desire to improve the population, whereas the ‘new genetics’ is, as both a term and a concept, possible because we live in a society that encourages neo-liberalism, i.e. a society managed through the political and cultural contract between government, people (the electorate) and their subsequent actions. For example, in developed countries the government acknowledges that it is much easier to achieve predetermined goals if people believe that they are autonomous and have ‘freedom of choice’. So utilizing one of the key aspects of neo-liberalism, ‘active citizenship’, people are encouraged to manage their own affairs through adopting risk minimizing strategies, such as screening. Based upon neoliberal principles, advances in genetic technologies have encouraged society to frame the individual as an ‘active seeker’ of information through the use of terms such as ‘freedom of choice’ and ‘autonomy’. Emphasis is placed on the importance of achieving genetic literacy so that the individual can minimize their ‘risk’ of developing disease. This, Petersen argues, has informed discussions about the new genetics and its benefits, diverting attention away from the global and social issues that affect health, and placing the responsibility of ill health with the individual and family members. Foucault’s work on bio-power is used to interpret the impact of the new genetics upon the public’s health. Bio-power, in its simplest form, is about the level of control that it is possible to achieve over life processes. The Human Genome Project (HGP) symbolizes the discourse and practices of bio-power because by revealing what happens at molecular level in the body, it then becomes possible to control conception, birth, morbidity and mortality. Petersen has selected to offer a rather optimistic perspective on the possible benefits of the HGP. There are numerous authors who are cautious about suggesting that knowledge of the genome can be of direct therapeutic value to the general population. However, Petersen documents his concern that

Governmentality, Critical Scholarship, and the Medical Humanities

Foucaults work has had a profound impact on the medical humanities over the last decade or so. However, most work to date has focused on Foucaults earlier writings rather than his later contributions on the self and governmentality. This article assesses the significance of the concept of governmentality for critical scholarship in the medical humanities, particularly in creating ethical awareness in the field of health care. It examines the context for Foucaults later work, and contributions arising from scholarship building on this work. The governmentality literature, it is argued, raises novel questions about the ways we have come to think about health care in late modern societies. However, there are some limitations with this body of work which have not been fully acknowledged by scholars. The article discusses some of these limitations and offers some suggestions for a fruitful way forward.

Healthy living and citizenship: an overview

The effort to achieve ‘healthy living’ or adopt a ‘healthy lifestyle’ has become a predominant concern of our time. A perusal of websites (such as those quoted above), daily news articles, public health journals and popular magazines reveals a bewildering array of pertinent research evidence and advice. Directives such as those above, calling on individuals to ‘take responsibility’ and make ‘smart choices’ in relation to diet, exercise, emotional wellness and so on, have become a common feature of the discourses of health in many societies. Although it is especially pervasive in contemporary Western societies, this emphasis on healthy living is neither new nor unique to these societies. As early as the fifth century, one can find a substantial body of Greek literature focusing on the preservation and restoration of health, including prescriptions about diet, exercise, bathing and other regular habits. The Hippocratic treatise, On Regimen, offered detailed norms about ‘correct living’ with a view to health, with many prescriptions concerning self-control (Wilson 2006, p. 337). In more recent times, this concern has at times reached fever pitch, perhaps most famously in Germany during the 1930s and 1940s when the Nazi Party sought to improve the health of German citizens through promoting low-fat, high fibre foods, and encouraging a reduced intake of tobacco, alcohol and coffee and an increased intake of natural foods (Proctor 1999). However, over the past three decades, concern about healthy living and the best means to achieve it would seem to have reached a new, consistently high level in many societies. This special issue focuses on the imperatives surrounding ‘healthy living’ and their personal, social and policy implications. The issue includes a number of papers drawn from an event, ‘Healthy living and citizenship’, attended by social scientists and philosophers from the UK, Europe and Australia and held at Monash University’s Prato Campus in Italy, in June 2009. Hosted by members of the Health, Wellbeing and Social Change research cluster, based in the School of Political and Social Inquiry at Monash University, the event sought to explore the meanings of health and wellbeing in light of the changing relationship between citizens and the

The new genetics and the politics of public health

Abstract The new genetics promises a new kind of public health practice in which the health of populations is defined by freedom from risk of genetic disease. This paper critically examines a number of assumptions underlying the genetic conception of health and discusses some likely implications of the increasing use of the technologies of genetic screening and genetic counselling in the fulfilment of public health objectives. It examines concepts of the body, the self and society underlying the search for genetic-based disease, and it unpacks the rhetoric of the ‘right to know’ and ‘informed choice’ which characterizes the discourse of the new genetics. The paper also explores some implications of the focus on ‘the family’ in genetic counselling, drawing particular attention to new inter-personal responsibilities and obligations implied by the need to know about the genetic health of ones family members and future offspring. The paper concludes by stressing the need for a thoroughgoing appraisal of the ...

Technologies of hope: techniques of the online advertising of stem cell treatments

Recent media portrayals of developments in stem cell research underline the high expectations that surround this field. Trials for stem cell treatments are currently underway around the world; however, very few applications are widely available. In spite of this, a range of purported stem cell therapies are being marketed directly to patients, principally via the Internet. Scientists and clinicians have expressed concerns about the marketing of unproven treatments but responses thus far have been based upon a limited understanding of the dynamics of the advertising of such treatments. Drawing on the findings from a qualitative analysis of online, “direct-to-consumer” advertisements (DTCA) for stem cell treatments, this article examines the role played by such advertisements in the “political economy of hope.” It reveals the various techniques used by advertisers to effect a positive portrayal of treatments and thus help engender confidence in treatments and trust in providers. It concludes by discussing the implications of the findings for policy responses to the marketing of such treatments.

Opening the black box: scientists' views on the role of the news media in the nanotechnology debate

Increasingly, scientists and policy makers have come to recognize that if nanotechnologies are to achieve wide public acceptance, it is essential to engage publics during the early phase of technology development. The media, situated at the interface between scientists and lay publics, possess the potential to play a significant role in public engagement in this field. This article, drawing on data from a recent survey and interview-based study, examines how scientists perceive and evaluate the production and coverage of news on nanotechnologies. Scientists acknowledged the significance of the media in shaping public perceptions of nanotechnologies and saw a role for the media in public engagement efforts. Most had criticisms of media coverage and offered suggestions as to how it could be improved. However, their comments often revealed a one-dimensional conception of science mediation that overlooked the influence of their own claims. Any efforts to enrich public dialogue about nanotechnologies must endeavor to advance understanding among scientists about the operations of the media and their own role in news production.

Framing risk: nanotechnologies in the news

The concept of ‘framing’ is being increasingly recognised as a useful means of characterising the social relations of representation shaping the news reporting of science and risk. In theoretical terms, framing is often described as a discursive strategy utilised by journalists to define the nature of a particular event, a complex process with important implications for how certain occurrences are selected as newsworthy, the conventions guiding the ways in which they are reported and the possible consequences for influencing public perceptions. Focusing on the news reporting of nanotechnologies, this paper explores the relative advantages and limitations of ‘framing’. It draws on data from two UK studies, one examining news media production of nanotechnologies and the other examining scientists’ and policy‐makers’ views on the future applications of nanotechnologies. We highlight the key role played by scientists as news sources and hence potentially influential actors in issue definition. We argue that risk researchers need to pay closer attention to the behind‐the‐scenes politics of framing, whereby competing claims‐makers seek to establish their own particular interpretation of the situation.

From uncertainty to risk?: Scientific and news media portrayals of nanoparticle safety

Abstract This article examines how nanotechnology has been portrayed in the British newspaper press over an extended period (from April 1, 2003 to July 1, 2006) and the views of scientists involved in nanotechnology research and journalists who wrote news stories. Two methodological strategies are employed: first, recurring patterns in the press coverage were identified using content analysis. Second, scientists and journalists were questioned about their views of coverage and of how health risks were represented. The study revealed that for scientists the most prominent risk issue was nanoparticle safety, although this received only scant attention in the press. Scientists expressed particular concern that efforts be made to regulate pertinent applications before possible health risks become a controversial issue. Both scientists and journalists acknowledged the difficulties of communicating the concept of risk given the uncertainties of nanotechnologies. The implications of the findings for news reporting of nanotechnology risks are discussed.