4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.3. COLLABORATION
4.4.2. MEDIALIZATION IN GLOBAL MASS MEDIA DISCOURSE
Scientific discourse on forest present in the mass media can be examined for both levels of analysis, namely, for the both the global as the local or national level. The results for each of the medialization factors will be here on presented for the global level. National level will be treated afterwards.
4.4.2.1.EXTENSIVENESS
As in the scientific discourse on forest in the scientific sphere, the extension of the three issues will be examined through the variation in time of the number of articles published in the media for each of the issues selected. The existence of extensiveness will be indicated by the increase in the number of articles published by the global media on each issue.
If the total number of articles is considered for the time frame (summing articles for all issues) a slight increase in the number of articles published from the beginning of the period analyzed related to forests can be observed. Table 4.12 shows this result. From two articles covering the issues in 1994 the media attention increased to 15 articles in 2003. The first mayor increase in the media attention was found in 1997; mostly due to the increment in forest fires articles provoked by the fires occurring in Indonesia that year (19 articles can be found this year). The following year the media attention dropped slightly, to 17 articles, but was once again marked by the consequences of the fires occurring in Indonesia.
Table 4.12.Total number of global media articles from 1994-2003 (material source “EQMGW”; own calculations)
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 TOTAL
N 2 8 1 19 17 8 13 18 18 15 119
After the year 1997, the number of articles found dealing with forest science, or science dealing with forest-related issues, was maintained relatively stable. A drop in the attention of the media was found in 1999, but otherwise, from 1997 onward, more than 13 articles per year were found. Following this result, the extensiveness assumption cannot be either confirmed or denied because the total number of articles for these issues is low. When comparing these number to, for example, the total number of articles dealing with
“climate change” (not restricted to news related to forest issues) the low importance that
Results and Discussion
129
the media gives forest related topics can be seen. For both the global media analyzed (Time Magazine and the International Herald Tribune) 625 articles were found for the same time period64. Consequently, for the sole issue of climate change over 19% more articles were found than all three analyzed forest-related issues together. This is then evidence for the low media attention to the subject forest, and the science related to it, as a news issue. As a whole, the extensiveness of the issues cannot be confirmed. However, differences may arise when examining the issues separately.
Figure 4.22 shows the distribution of the articles for each issue in the global media. The contribution of the forest fires articles and climate change to the total amount of articles found for the period analyzed can be seen. The figure confirms that extensiveness for any issue cannot be confirmed. The media attention goes back and forth on both climate change and forest fires and is less attentive to biodiversity.
The peaks regarding the forest fires issues are a consequence of the fires starting in Indonesia in September of 1997, which carried grave consequences not only for that particular country and its‟ population, but for neighboring countries and the global environment as well. The occurrence of the fires prolonged into 1998 and with them the discussion of the consequences of the fires. The fires occurring in 1998 are then the reason for the prolonged media attention to the issues related with forest fires. The increase of reports in the years 2002 and 2003 are consequences of attention paid by the media to fires occurring in the United States and Canada and their far reaching consequences such as, necessity of local legislation or the ecological damages caused.
For climate change, there seems to be an increase in the total number of reports, this issue having three distinct peaks. First in 1995 an increment on the attention of forest and climate change was due to the first major conference on global warming since the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 taking place in Berlin, as well as a report published by the United Nations claiming evidence of the occurrence of global warming and the consequences of it for, amongst others, forests. A second peak is observed in 1998 which is due to reports that relate the forest fires occurring in the Asian region, their consequences to the emission of carbon dioxide and its‟ contribution to global warming.
These reports speak of the intertwinement of the two issues and their relevance for the global environment. The highest peak is observed in 2001 year in which debates occur on the possibilities to off-set carbon emissions –especially through forests as carbon sinks;
advances of countries to reduce carbon emissions; the negative of the United States to ratify the Kyoto Protocol; as well as reports on evidence of global warming throughout the Earth. The focus of these articles is presenting solutions to global warming, and especially on the role of the forests in helping mitigate climate change. As time has advance this topics has become more present in the media debates, thus giving slight evidence of the extensiveness factor of the medialization phenomenon.
64 Searched was done using LexisNexis and search function in www.time.com.
130
Figure 4.22. Number of articles throughout 1994-2003 for the three global issues (material source
“EQMGW”; own calculations)
Biodiversity, on the other hand, is the one subject in which media attention seems not to vary much. Aside from one notable peak in the year 2000, no great variation as with the other two issues is observed. This is noticeable since biological diversity is an issue which, in comparison to climate change, has been longer on the agenda (especially since the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992). It seems that, even though biological diversity is an issue which is every single year present in the media, it is not one that is easily related to forest science, or science in the forestry field. Specifically, the issues of biodiversity that opens the door for news featuring science related to forests, report on the loss of species that are found in a forest habitat and what can be done to avoid this (this is especially the case for the year 2000). This result might be caused by a strategy of the media to report on biodiversity from other perspectives (other than scientific perspectives) or that when reporting on biological diversity no mention to forest or forest related science is made.
However, the results leave open the door for interpretation. Thus, for this issue extensiveness must be denied.
Comparing these results to those found for the global scientific discourse on forest science differences arise. While in the scientific discourse all issues evidenced extensiveness in that the number of publications grew through time, in the global media discourse on forest science the extensiveness could only be slightly verified for the issue of climate change, especially starting in the year 2000.
For the issue of forest fires, the extensiveness of the media discourse could not be denied nor confirm, as the media coverage grew a great deal when a catastrophic event took place, but drop sharply when no such event took place. The difference between the two discourses, in this case might be explained if the topics discussed in each of these spheres are considered. While the scientific discourse on forest fires centered its articles on fires as a management option, or as events which influenced the present composition of forest ecosystems, the media discourse centered its coverage on studies regarding causes, damages, and the impact on climate change; topics of discussions that do not have many similarities without which it might be understandable that no coincidence of their evolution through time, in terms of more coverage, might be found.
Finally, for the issue of biodiversity where in the global scientific level a clear increase in the article publication was seen, on the global level of the media no increase in coverage can be found, thus denying the extensiveness for this issue.
Results and Discussion
131
For specific coincidences or dissimilarities of the issues between these two specific spheres a frame analysis, different points of views presented in the articles, of the issues is a relevant topic of research that might be in future pursued.
4.4.2.1.1. SUMMARY EXTENSIVENESS
For the global media discourse on forest science the previous results have shown that depending on the issue, evidence for the medialization of science may or may not be found. While medialization was found for the issue of climate change, it could not be confirmed or denied for forest fires, and it was denied for the issue of biodiversity.
Compared to the global scientific discourse coincidence on the existence of extensiveness was only found for climate change.
4.4.2.2.PLURALIZATION
Turning the attention to the second medialization factor to be examined, table 4.13 was constructed. This table shows that the global media discourse on forest science, or science relating to forests, is characterized by the presence of a variety of speakers. Eleven different classifications were found which describe who speaks in the mass media.
Amongst the actors incorporating their interpretation patterns in the discourse are scientists, politicians, administration, enterprises, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), international organizations such as the United Nations, the World Bank, Food and Agricultural Organization, other organizations for example museums, single persons or communities, as well as experts. The media is as well a speaker in the discourse. As Krumland (2003, p.93) has noted, the role of the media is not as producer of news or reports but comes to be a speaker as a consequence of introducing the news or reports, as well as the groups of actors speaking and their interpretation patterns. The media brings their interpretation patterns in the discourse not only through these introductions but as well in sections like editorial or opinion pieces.
The results of table 4.13 show that no one group of actors clearly dominates the discourse. Scientists are the speakers that appear most frequently in two of the three issues namely, climate change (on third of all speakers) and biodiversity (one fourth of all speakers). In the articles on forest fires, scientists are the third most important group after the administration sector and the media. This result might reflect that when forest science -or science relating to forests- is included in the reports of the media, scientists and their interpretation patterns are given priority as speakers by the media or that this is a topic which more frequently appears in the media when scientists have something to say about it. There is also an important presence of administrative actors in the discourse on forest fires and climate change, more so than politicians. For forest fires this is an understandable result as the administration sector of a country is usually the actor who is in charge of giving status reports on the extent of fires and on the damages caused by them. This might also indicate that politicians do not see these specific topics as „political‟
enough in the sense that they have a big resonance with the public or are the center of important societal discussion (as for example the topic of stem cell research has been) and so their involvement is kept in range.
132
Table 4.13. Distribution of speakers in the global mass media discourse (material source “EQMGW”; own calculations)
Speakers Forest Fires Biodiversity Climate Change
n % of N n % of N n % of N
Scientists 41 15,13% 28 25,45% 83 33,60%
Politicians 7 2,58% 1 0,91% 10 4,05%
Administration 51 18,82% 7 6,36% 26 10,53%
Media 49 18,08% 17 15,45% 32 12,96%
Enterprises 4 1,48% 3 2,73% 16 6,48%
NGOs 4 1,48% 24 21,82% 13 5,26%
International
Organizations 7 2,58% 7 6,36% 23 9,31%
Other
Organizations 35 12,92% 4 3,64% 16 6,48%
Single persons or communities 36 13,28% 10 9,09% 11 4,45%
Experts 21 7,75% 5 4,55% 7 2,83%
Other 16 5,90% 4 3,64% 8 3,24%
Not Recognizable 0 0 2 0,81%
TOTAL (N) 271 110 247
For biodiversity, the second most frequent actor is non-governmental organizations: a little more than one out of every five speaker belongs to this group. The participation of NGOs in the discourse is mainly as advocates for biological species that are in danger of becoming extinct; raising their voices to proclaim preservation efforts in order to save the species and the forests they live in. The larger participation of NGOs in the issue of biodiversity might have something to do with the type of issue being considered and the instrumentalization of it on behalf of the interests of non-governmental organizations, such as ones oriented to the protection of species. Generally, the public relations activities of these organizations are much more experienced than, for example, scientists- in dealing with the media and the public in order to get their points of view or messages across.
For both forest fires and biodiversity the presence of different actor groups other than scientists indicates a pluralized discussion of the issues. The participation of administration, NGOs and other actor-groups assure that the issues incorporate different points of view.
For climate change the existence of pluralization is not as clear. The presence of scientists in this later issue is most noticeable in comparison to other actors (one out of every three speakers). The second and third most frequent actors participating in discourse are the media with 12,96% and administration 10,53%, a difference of more than 20% with scientists. In the previous two issues, the difference in participation between the leading actor group and the following groups was not as pronounced as the difference observed in the climate change issue. For example, for forest fires the difference between the top three participating actors amounted to little more than a three percent difference, which is as well the difference for biodiversity between scientists and the following more participative actor NGOs .This could be due to the fact that the media still see climate change, and its‟ relation to the forest, as a more or less „pure‟ scientific issue, and thus
Results and Discussion
133
when reporting about it they seek the participation of those with scientific knowledge, namely scientists.
Forest fires on the other hand may not be seen as „scientific‟ as climate change; as the proportion of scientists participating in this issue is less than half the proportion of scientists participating in climate change. The media coverage on forest fires as an issue which is not as „scientific‟ as climate change may also be confirmed by the higher participation of actors such as single persons or communities which give details on the damages and consequences they have suffered because of these negative events. The coverage of forest fires might be seen as more personalized in the sense that it focuses on the effects the events have on individual persons and their everyday lives or the opinions of these persons. While the issue climate change may be seen as one in which not the individual effect of the events is „news worthy‟ but the scientific information relevant for the discussions.
Another relevant result is the participation of international organizations such as the United Nations and the World Bank. Their participation is highest in climate change and lowest in forest fires. This result speaks of the political relevance on the global level of the issue climate change and the local perspective of an issue such as forest fires. For climate change, on the one hand, the relevance of international organizations such as, and especially like, the United Nations is reflected as these organizations try to provide framework for international processes regarding combative measure on global warming.
The participation of single persons and communities well indicates, on the other hand, the locality of the issue of forest fires and the global political relevance of the issue climate change; being the participation of this actor group the highest in the forest fires issue (13,48%) and the lowest in climate change (4,45%).
The participation of enterprises is more related to the issue climate change than the other two. 6,48% of the speakers are representatives of enterprises. Amongst actors belonging to this group are representatives of insurance companies who see the consequences of global warming in the evermore higher occurrence of extreme events:
''[T]here have been strong, strong catastrophes in all ages, what we see clearly is that changing in global climate warming would change the velocity of events.
Extremes get more extreme and the frequency changes. An extreme we used to see once every 10 years, we now see every six years or eight years.'' (IHT 2001)
Other representatives of enterprises see that the reduction of emissions as a business strategy that must be internalized by the enterprises:
“This isn't an act of altruism," … "It's a fundamental strategic issue for our business.", (IHT 2001)
Additionally, there are those enterprises that favor the planting of trees as mitigation of carbon dioxide emission that are released because of flights, as one representative of an enterprise illustrates when paying others to plant trees for every 1,500 „passenger miles‟ its employees fly:
134
“It‟s part of our program to minimize our impact on the environment … The cost is minimal, and we create enormous good will” (IHT 2003)
From all speakers enterprises along -and to a lesser extent- international organizations are the only speakers in the issue of climate change that somewhat increase their participation through time. For example speakers from enterprises participate in three of the 10 years examined. Their participation is shy in the years 2000 and 2001-only one participant in each of the years- and explodes to seven participants in the year 2003. This is mostly related to the discussion of forests as carbon sink and the opportunity this presents for them. International organizations participated in the earlier years analyzed (1995, 1997, and 1998), were silent until 2001 where seven participants spoke, and drop a bit in the year 2002 (with five speakers). Their participation was associated with the Kyoto Protocol and the mechanisms it established for mitigating greenhouse gases emissions.
For the other issues, only in forest fires a particular increment in the number of scientists participating in discourse can be observed. Particular, because their participation increases in the years 1997-1998 and 2001-2003; which are the years in which specific catastrophic fires in Asia and Brazil were occurring.
4.4.2.2.1. SUMMARY PLURALIZATION
From the previous results and discussion it is clear that the pluralization of issues regarding forest science –or science relating to the field of forestry- is taking place. This is specially the case for both biodiversity and forest fire issue but a bit less evident for the climate change issue.
4.4.2.3.CONTROVERSY
In the previous section it is clear that the media discourse is more open to the participation of different types of actors when dealing with the issues relating to the forest than the scientific discourse on forest science was. According to Schäfer, this wider participation implies that the scientific topics will be discussed in a controversial way since the inclusion of many actors and their interpretation patterns assures that the issues will be dealt with in different, and sometimes contradicting, ways. Controversy will be here
In the previous section it is clear that the media discourse is more open to the participation of different types of actors when dealing with the issues relating to the forest than the scientific discourse on forest science was. According to Schäfer, this wider participation implies that the scientific topics will be discussed in a controversial way since the inclusion of many actors and their interpretation patterns assures that the issues will be dealt with in different, and sometimes contradicting, ways. Controversy will be here