ABSTRACT

This study explores the growing news coverage of e-cigarettes regarding, (a) how the arguments regarding e-cigarettes are presented in the print news media in the United States (US), United Kingdom (UK), and Korea; (b) which arguments were under-represented; and (c) to what extent scientific research shapes the arguments. Results suggest that the most salient argument in the US and UK was that e-cigarettes are less harmful (or “safer”) than regular cigarettes. Although both US and UK news recognized e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation tool, US news framed e-cigarettes from a negative viewpoint. In Korean news, the dominant argument concerned e-cigarette ingredients. The public health frame competed against economic frames in Korean media coverage. With the exception of epidemiological data, scientific studies received very little media coverage in all three countries. Reports of scientific uncertainty were correlated with the level of controversy on e-cigarette issues, and limitations of scientific studies were described to highlight such controversy. Lastly, we discussed issues that were neglected in the news regarding e-cigarettes in all three countries.

摘要

本研究探讨了有关电子烟的日益增长的新闻报道：(a) 美国（美国）、英国（英国）和韩国的印刷新闻媒体如何呈现有关电子烟的论点；(b) 哪些论点代表性不足；(c) 科学研究在多大程度上塑造了论点。结果表明，美国和英国最突出的论点是电子烟比普通香烟危害更小（或“更安全”）。尽管美国和英国的新闻都承认电子烟是一种戒烟工具，但美国的新闻却从负面的角度对电子烟进行了框架化。在韩国新闻中，主要论点与电子烟成分有关。在韩国媒体的报道中，公共卫生框架与经济框架竞争。除了流行病学数据，科学研究在这三个国家几乎没有得到媒体报道。科学不确定性的报告与电子烟问题的争议程度相关，科学研究的局限性被描述为突出这种争议。最后，我们讨论了三个国家有关电子烟的新闻中被忽视的问题。