"Gene-fouled or gene-improved?" – Media framing of GM crops and food in Hungary

This paper presents results from a research which analyzed the reporting on genetically modified crops and food in the Hungarian tabloids and political papers with the highest circulation from 1 May 2007 to 31 October 2009. Both quantitative and qualitative media analysis was conducted. It was found that in contrast to some Western countries the issue had low salience in the investigated period; it featured especially marginally in the tabloids. Two distinct valenced frames could be differentiated: a dominant ANTI-GM (Threat) frame – which was particularly frequent compared to what has been found for some other countries, and a minority PRO-GM (Advancement and Benefits) frame. Despite a range of similarities with what had been reported by previous research from some other countries, argumentation on the GMO topic in the Hungarian press had several distinct characteristics, one of which was the relative prominence of economic arguments against the technology.

Media presentation and public understanding of stem cells and stem cell research in Hungary

This paper reports on a research project which examined media coverage and audience perceptions of stem cells and stem cell research in Hungary, using focus groups and a media analysis. A background study was also conducted on the Hungarian legal, social and political situation linked to stem cell research, treatment and storage. Our data shows how stem cell research/treatments were framed by the focus group members in terms of medical results/cures and human interest stories – mirroring the dominant frames utilized by the Hungarian press. The spontaneous discourse on stem cells in the groups involved a non-political and non-controversial understanding – also echoing the dominant presentation of the media. Comparing our results with those of a UK study, we found that although there are some similarities, UK and Hungarian focus group participants framed the issue of stem cell research differently in many respects – and these differences often echoed the divergences of the media coverage in the two countries. We conclude by arguing against approaches which attribute only negligible influence to the media – especially in the case of complex scientific topics and when the dominant information source for the public is the media.