Research on difference of Issues Frames between News Releases and News Coverage：The Case of H1N1 as an example

• Main Authors: Ju-Mei Chang, 常如梅
• Other Authors: 陳一香
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2011
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/87718679773746916224

碩士 === 世新大學 === 公共關係暨廣告學研究所(含碩專班) === 99 === In April 2009, H1N1 erupted in Mexico, killing 84 people and swiftly spreading to other countries. In light of the lesson from SARS epidemic, people were urged to be inoculated. However, in the process, there was a significant decline in the number of people receiving vaccinations. The purpose of this study was to find out, through the PR news releases of Department of Health, Executive Yuan and the news reports of the media, what messages were sent by the competent authorities, how those information and frameworks were presented by the media, what were the differences between the two, and what were the reasons for the those differences. In this study, the method of content analysis was used to conduct quantitative analysis on the PR news releases issued by CDC (the Centers for Disease Control) and the news reports of the Apple Daily, the Liberty Times and the United Daily News, thereby to explore PR news releases by the health authorities in charge, news media’s H1N1 thematic frameworks, news sources and media’s positions on news. Additionally, a comparison was made on the difference between thematic frameworks and news sources. The directions of H1N1-related reports were also explored through in-depth interviews with officials from CDC Public Relations Department, PR consultants and reporters. The following are the findings of this study: 1. The sources of the PR news releases were too concentrated and failed to include opinions from experts with different positions: Compared with the news sources of the media which were more diversified, the content of the PR news releases issued by the CDC were mostly based on the viewpoints of the competent authorities executives, not including the pinions from related academics and experts, which has easily subjected CDC position to the suspicion from both the public and the media. 2. Inadequate topics were discussed in the PR news releases: Most of the CDC news releases were related to the routine reports on the development of the disease, the number of infected people or the inspection itinerary of officials. To news reporters, those reports had very little news value and could only be used as reference. Thus, they were compelled to find other topics to report. 3. Attention should be paid to the thoughts of stakeholders: Communications are very important in government’s pushing for a policy. People’s trust in the government will be affected when the authorities’ vaccination policy is questioned by doctors or medical professionals. 4. News topics were overly concentrated and other perspectives ignored: Very often, the media would be attracted to one single incident and concentrated their new reports on the event, resulting in the negligence of other developments. This has not only limited the content of news reports but also affected the public’s awareness of H1N1. 5. The depth and scope of news topics need to be strengthened and one-way communication should be avoid: Most of the policy-related reports by CDC and the media only focused on the content of policies but failed to explain on the decision-making process and its background and reasons. This kind of one-way statement couldn’t achieve communication and interaction between the media, experts and the public. 6. Communication on risk needs to be made in advance: Before vaccination, the government needs to communicate on the risk of inoculation to allow the public to have a correct understanding on and proper expectations for inoculations.