The First International Conference on Radiation and Dosimetry in Various Fields of Research

„IONIZING RADIATION“ IN PRINTED MEDIA IN SERBIA

Gorana Đorić, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Niš

Gordana Stojić, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Niš

Objectives

• Exploratory study into the incidence of topics related to ionizing radiation in printed media in Serbia

• What has been defined as real is real in its consequences - to a considerable extent media define the way ionizing radiation is perceived by the public

• Findings provide an insight into the public perception of the ionizing radiation phenomenon.

• Findings could be used to facilitate mobilisation of public support for the decisions related to ionizing radiation which might have efect on population.

Research questions• What does the media say about the risks of

ionizing radiation? • What does the media say about the protection

from ionizing radiation? • What does the public want to know about the

issue (based on the comments on published texts)?

• Does the public trust media sources informing about ionizing radiation?

• What are the readers’ major fears? • Who provides the information published and in

which way is the information presented? • What trigers the interest of media and the public

in ionizing radiation related phenomena?

Method

• Mostly read daily newspapers in Serbia

• Content analysis method used

• Unit of analysis is a text and comentaries on the text

• The sample consists of the texts published in the analysed papers in 2011 (or the last year for which the record is available)

• Selection criteria – key words refering to the ionizing radiation in different contexts

Circulation data on daily newspapers in Serbia

Newspapers Total circulation Trends2009 2010 2011 copies % trend

Večernje novosti

136,426 130,278 125,511 -6,148 -4.5% ▼

Blic 152,237 146,231 145,469 -6,007 -3.9% ▼

Alo 78,830 113,666 128,183 34,836 44.2%

▲

Politika 69,883 63,355 61,829 -6,528 -9.3% ▼

Pravda N/A 19,235 15,380 N/A N/A N/A

Selection key words

• Radiation • Nuclear accident • Fukushima • Depleted uranium • Nuclear waste• Nuclear power plant

• Mammography • Medical diagnostic

radiation• Roentgen x rays• Gamma rays• Ionizing radiation

Analytic dimensions

• the source of ionizing radiation being discused, • source of information, • type of information, • type of commentary to a text,• prevalent topic of the text,• value orientation of the text, • visual presentation, • the occasion motivating the text, • the context within which the information is

interpreted• actors involved.

This presentation• Blic 2011

Number of articles

• dimensions:– the occasion motivating the text– prevalent topic of the text– source of information– type of commentary to a text

Total 174

Of which world 120

Media reporting• When media report:

– Nuclear accident in Fukushima

– Chernobyl anniversary

– Storage of nuclear waste

– No special occasion

• Most frequent topics:– Nuclear accidents in the world– Radiation risks in Serbia because of:

• Fukushima accident

• Storage of nuclear waste

• Nuclear plants in surrounding countries

– Ionizing radiation in medicine

Sources of information• Official and Experts:

– Serbian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency– Public company “Nuclear Facilities in Serbia” (PC NFS)– Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences– Serbian Chamber of Commerce– Republic Hydrometeorological Institute of Serbia– Institute for Occupational Medicine and Radiological

Protection– Faculty of Science, Novi Sad– Ministry and Provincial Secretariat – “experts”

• NGOs• Industry

Types of commentaries

• not enough or too much information– “Why our media do not report, but media in e.g. Italy/Germany

report about it?”

– “Give me wisdom not to worry about what I cannot change”

– “There are more urgent problems for common people to worry about”

• quality of information– “I want meaningful, precise and timely information from all

relevant sources”

– “I doubt radioactivity would come to Serbia, it is too long distance, after all” (expert)

– “How far Fukushima is? Who knows?”

– “I really can not understand so much contradictions in the same text on the same subject”

Types of commentaries

• “to trust or not to trust”– “If it is not important, why do you mention it?”

– “The largest nuclear waste storage in Europe? What for? Import of European nuclear waste?”

• related to previous experiences– Lack of information about consequences of NATO

campaign and Chernobyl accident

• related to politics and problems in society• “Europe is straggling with radiation, but our politicians

have protected us and the region as well.”

Good practices - examples

• Providing with sources of information – Link of Serbian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety

Agency

• Providing with precise information – tables, maps

• Detailed description of measurement procedures– Vegetable grown in fields

• Explaining the meaning of presented values• Several sources of information, “to hear both sides”

– What officials, experts and NGOs say about the pollution near Prahovo

THANKS.