Appraisal of Mass Media in Reporting Domestic Research Results: Ethiopian News Agency (ENA) and Walta Information Center (WIC) in Focus

Asmamaw Addis Amera 1 *
More Detail
1 Dilla University, Ethiopia
* Corresponding Author
Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, Volume 6, Issue 3, pp. 15-44. https://doi.org/10.29333/ojcmt/2557
OPEN ACCESS   2002 Views   1969 Downloads   Published online: 26 Jul 2016
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

The aim of this research is to analyze news coverage of two wire services in Ethiopia, namely ENA and WIC. The research also appraises the role of these news media in relation to the contribution of local research dissemination. 340 sample news stories are chosen for content analysis from both wire services. Systematic sampling technique is employed to pick representative news items. The selected stories have been covered by news media of the country. 18 key informants are also used purposively for interview. The findings of the study have shown that the range of ENA and WIC news coverage is diverse and wide, but the proportion given to issues in news coverage is imbalanced. Educational, health, agricultural and science and technology, for example, are local topics that have got very little news recognition and attention. The coverage of local and foreign research findings of ENA is almost the same and equal in proportion. Whereas in the case of WIC, the coverage of foreign research findings is quadruple than the coverage of local research findings. This indicates local research findings have got little attention and recognition in the news coverage. It shows journalists’ engagement in reporting and popularizing local research findings is very low. Even, the finding from the news media further implied that the researchers are less attracted by the media.
Keywords: news coverage, local research dissemination, ENA, WIC

CITATION

Amera, A. A. (2016). Appraisal of Mass Media in Reporting Domestic Research Results: Ethiopian News Agency (ENA) and Walta Information Center (WIC) in Focus. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 6(3), 15-44. https://doi.org/10.29333/ojcmt/2557

REFERENCES

  • Akala, J. W. (2004). Can journalism enhance dissemination of higher education? A critical analysis of Kenya’s print media. Paris: UNESCO colloquium on Research and Higher Education Policy.
  • Bero, L. B., Boyd, E. A., Cook, D. M., & Grossmann, C. (2009). Journalists and conflicts of interest in science: beliefs and practices. Accessed from: www.int-res.com
  • Baran, J. S, & Davis, K. D. (2012). Mass Communication Theory: foundations, ferment, and future. 4th ed. USA: Thomson Wadsworth.
  • Bauer, W.M, & Bucchi, M. (2007). Journalism, Science and Society: science communication between news and public relations. Taylor and Francis Group, LLC. New York.
  • Burns, T. W., O'Connor, D. J. & Stocklmayer, S. M. (2003) Science Communication: A Contemporary Definition. Public Understanding of Science. 12, 183–202. Accessed from http://pus.sagepub.com/content/12/2/183
  • Brewer, M. B. & Crano, W. D. (2008). Principles and Methods of Social Research. London: Taylor & Francis e-Library. (Adobe eReader Format) ISBN 1-4106-1313-5.
  • Brumfiel, G. (2009). Supplanting the Supplanting the old media? Nature, 458, 274–277.
  • Bryman, A. (1998). Quantity and Quality in Social Research. In M. Bulmer (Eds) Contemporary Social Research Series, 1-195.
  • Bryman, A. (2004). Quantity and Quality in Social Research. London: Taylor & Francis eLibrary. (Adobe eReader Format) ISBN 0-203-71826-7.
  • Chan, L, & Costa, S. (2005). Participation in the global knowledge commons: Challenges and opportunities for research dissemination in developing countries, 106(1210/1211), pp. 141-163. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
  • Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public policy. (2009). On Being A Scientist: a guide to responsible conduct in research. National academy of sciences, national academy of engineering, and institute of medicine. Washington, DC: The national academy of press.
  • Dawson, C. (2009). Introduction to Research Methods: A practical guide for any undertaking a research project. 4th ed. UK, How To Books Ltd. (Adobe eReader Format) ISBN 978 1 84803 342 9.
  • Davies, S. R. (2008). Constructing communication: Talking to scientists About Talking to the Public. Science Communication, 29(4), pp.413-434. Accessed from: http://online.sagepub.com
  • Dunwoody, S. (2008). Science journalism. Bucchi, M. & Trench, B. (Eds.) Handbook of public communication of science and technology, (pp. 15 -24).
  • Dunwoody, S. (2008). What’s a Journalist to Do? Challenges and Approaches to Reporting Scientific Assessment. In J. Susan Hassol & J. Katzenberger (Eds.), Characterizing and Communicating Scientific uncertainty: A Report of the Aspen Global Change Institute Elements of Change Series (pp. 46-49). Colorado, USA.
  • Einsiedel, E. F. (2008). Public participation and dialogue. In M. Bucchi & B. Trench (Eds.) Handbook of public communication of science and technology, (pp.173 – 184).
  • Eperen, L. V., Marincola, F. M., & Strohm, J. (2010). Bridging the Divide between Science and Journalism. Journal of Translational Medicine. Accessed from: http://www.translational-medicine.com/content/8/1/25
  • European Commission. (2007). European Research in the Media: What do media professionals think? Research-eu. Accessed on 7/14/2010 from http://ec.europa.eu/research/research-eu
  • Fauman, J., & Sharp, H. (1958). Presenting the Results of Research to the Public. Public Opinion Quarterly, 22, 107-115.
  • Fico, F., Lacy, S., & Riffe, D. (2008). Analyzing Media Messages: Using Quantitative Content Analysis in Research. London: Taylor & Francis e-Library. ISBN 1-4106-1342-9.
  • Jensen, K. B., & Jankowski, W. N. (2002). A Handbook of Qualitative Methodologies for Mass Communication Research. London: Taylor & Francis e-Library. (Adobe eReader Format) ISBN 0-203-71804-6.
  • Gunter, B. (2000). Media Research Methods: Measuring Audiences, Reactions and Impact.
  • London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
  • Kiernan, V. (2003). Diffusion of News about Research. Science Communication, 25(1), 3-13, Sage Publications.
  • Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content Analysis: an introduction to its methodology. London, UK: Sage Publications, Inc. ISBN 0-7619-1544-3.
  • Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques. (2nd ed.). New Delhi, New Age International (P) Limited, Publishers. ISBN (13): 978-81-224-2488-1.
  • Lewenstein, B. V. (2002). Editorial: A decade of Public Understanding, 11, 1-4. Accessed from: http://pus.sagepub.com/content/11/1/1.refs.html
  • Lievrouw, L. A. (1990). Communication and the social representation of scientific knowledge.
  • Critical studies in mass communication, 7(1), 1-10.
  • Miller, J. D. (2004). Public understanding of Science and attitudes toward scientific research:
  • what we know and what we need to know. Public Understand. Sci. 13, 273-294. Sage Publications. Accessed from www.sagepublications.com .
  • McQuail, D. (2003). McQuail’s Mass Communication Theory. (4th ed). London: Sage Publications.
  • Media for science forum. (2010). Declaration Media for science forum. Available at www.mediaforscience.com Accessed on 7/27/2010.
  • Motomu, I., & Suleski, J. (2010). Scientists are talking, but mostly to each other: a quantitative analysis of research represented in mass media. Accessed on October 24, 2010 from http://pus.sagepub.com/content/19/1/115
  • Rao, K. M. (2001). Scholarly Communication and Electronic Journals: issues and prospects for academic and research libraries. Library Review, 50, 169-175.
  • Schäfer, M. S. (2009). From Public Understanding to Public Engagement: An Empirical From Public Understanding to Public Engagement. Science Communication, 30(4), 475-505. Accessed from http://scx.sagepub.com/content/30/4/475.
  • Schudson, M. (2003). The Sociology of News: contemporary societies. USA: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.
  • Semir, D. V. (2000). Scientific journalism: Problems and perspectives. Internatl Microbiol, 3, 125-128, Springer-Verlag Ibérica, Spain.
  • Semir, D. V. (2010). Science Communication & Science Journalism. Accessed from www.mediaforscience.com
  • Silcock, J. (n.d). Disseminating Research: Choosing How and Where to Publish. Accessed on 7/27/2010 from www.leedsuniversity.uk.edu
  • Skjerdal, T. S. (2012). Competing loyalties: Journalism culture in the Ethiopian state media (Doctoral thesis), University of Oslo.
  • Sweden International Development Association. (2003). Ethiopia: Survey of Culture and Media. Stockholm.
  • Tenaw Terefe W/Mariam. (2006). Science Journalism in Ethiopia: Evolving a Viable Science Communication Model for Scientific Awareness among the Public. Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia.
  • Tumber, H. (1999). News: a reader. Oxford University press Inc. New York.
  • Thelwell, M. (2004). Research Dissemination and Invocation on the Web. Online Information Review, 26, 413-420.
  • Thompson, R. A., & Nelson, C. A. (2001). Developmental Science and the Media: Early Brain Development, 56(1), 5-15.
  • UNESCO. (2014). Free, Independent and Pluralistic Media in the Post-2015 Development Agenda: A Discussion Brief.
  • Vincent, R. (2005). Communicating Health Research: How Should Evidence Affect Policy and Practice. Accessed at 7/26/2010 from www.healthlink.org.