<p>Abstract</p><p><strong>Titel: </strong>Diagnosing accountability, a study of accountability of UNT and DN’s medical journalism  ( Diagnos av ansvarstagande, en studie av accountability inom DN och UNT:s medicinjournalistik)</p><p><strong>Number of pages: </strong>45 (59 including enclosures)</p><p><strong>Author:</strong> Alexandra Johansson</p><p><strong>Tutor: </strong>Göran Svensson</p><p><strong>Course: </strong>Media and Communication studies C<strong> </strong></p><p><strong>Period: </strong>Fall 2008<strong> </strong></p><p><strong>University: </strong>Division of Media and Communication, Department of Information Science, Uppsala University</p><p><strong>Purpose/Aim: </strong>To evaluate the quality of medical journalism in DN and UNT according to the theories of accountability and responsibility in the media.</p><p><strong>Material/Methods: </strong>The materials and methods used in this thesis are 14 articles from DN and 14 articles from UNT that have been analyzed according to the criterion set forth by Media Doctors, an Australian media accountability system.</p><p><strong>Main Results: </strong>The results showed that DN scored an average of 57% “satisfactory” and UNT scored an average of 52% “satisfactory” of Media Doctors rating scale. Strengths were an educational tone and an insightful review of the newest findings in the scientific community. Weaknesses were poor transparency and a tendency to neglect full disclosure of the scientific findings and sources. Focus was also show to be on research and not on information for potential patients. Media Doctor was also shown to be a well formatted media accountability system which gave insights to the broad uses of such systems.</p><p><strong>Keywords: </strong>Medical journalism, DN, UNT, Accountability, media accountability systems (MAS), Media Doctor.</p><p> </p><p> </p>

Abstract Titel: Diagnosing accountability, a study of accountability of UNT and DN’s medical journalism  ( Diagnos av ansvarstagande, en studie av accountability inom DN och UNT:s medicinjournalistik) Number of pages: 45 (59 including enclosures) Author: Alexandra Johansson Tutor: Göran Svensson Course: Media and Communication studies C Period: Fall 2008 University: Division of Media and Communication, Department of Information Science, Uppsala University Purpose/Aim: To evaluate the quality of medical journalism in DN and UNT according to the theories of accountability and responsibility in the media. Material/Methods: The materials and methods used in this thesis are 14 articles from DN and 14 articles from UNT that have been analyzed according to the criterion set forth by Media Doctors, an Australian media accountability system. Main Results: The results showed that DN scored an average of 57% “satisfactory” and UNT scored an average of 52% “satisfactory” of Media Doctors rating scale. Strengths were an educational tone and an insightful review of the newest findings in the scientific community. Weaknesses were poor transparency and a tendency to neglect full disclosure of the scientific findings and sources. Focus was also show to be on research and not on information for potential patients. Media Doctor was also shown to be a well formatted media accountability system which gave insights to the broad uses of such systems. Keywords: Medical journalism, DN, UNT, Accountability, media accountability systems (MAS), Media Doctor.

L’obiettivo di questo lavoro di ricerca è fare luce su alcuni dei motivi alla base di un rapporto tra scienza e media non sempre facile, nel tentativo di definire gli elementi fondamentali per un giornalismo biomedico divulgativo di qualità. In particolare l’analisi è rivolta al passaggio che più di tutti gli altri, nella costruzione della notizia, pone il giornalista e il metodo scientifico uno di fronte all’altro: la “traduzione” dell’articolo scientifico in articolo divulgativo. La valutazione di elementi quali l’approccio dei giornalisti alla significatività statistica e alla rilevanza clinica dei risultati di uno studio, l’utilizzo dei parametri statistici per esprimere gli esiti ha consentito di delineare una mappa dei punti di maggiore criticità del giornalismo biomedico. La “miscommunication” tra il mondo della ricerca e quello dei media può essere superata dall’acquisizione di un metodo che consenta al giornalista di individuare gli studi che hanno le caratteristiche per diventare notizie da divulgare. Questo lavoro è centrato sull’attività del giornalista, ma occorre ricordare come la comunicazione della salute sia un processo che dalla ricerca fino alla divulgazione pubblica delle notizie coinvolge diversi attori, ciascuno con il proprio ruolo e responsabilità ben precise. / The aim of this research is to investigate some of the reasons at the roots of the tension between science and media, trying to define some of the most important elements that could ensure the quality of biomedical lay journalism. In particular the attention is focused on the step that in the construction of the news puts the journalist and the scientific method one in front of the other: the “translation” of the scientific article in lay press article. From the analysis a picture emerges in which often the journalist is lacking an indispensable background knowledge needed to be able to recognize what is statistically significant or clinically relevant. The “miscommunication” theory, that both journalists and scientists consider an obstacle to scientific information, could be overcome by the acquisition of a method for medical journalists to recognize medical researches that can be used and moved into lay press articles. This research focuses on the correct role of journalist in divulging medical information. However, is important to underline the fact that many are the actors that partecipate to health communication and everyone has a specific role and than responsability.