Abortion analysis
 
University studies suggests the media are sidestepping difficult questions on a controversial issue Published: The Globe and Mail, June 8, 1990 BY DEBORAH JONES, HALIFAX ABORTION IS, for most people, an uncomfortable ethical dilemma. But two new studies from Mount Saint Vincent University here suggest that people who rely on the media for information about abortion may find the ethical debate non-existent. After reviewing coverage of abortion in three Toronto newspapers, two professors contend that the media virtually ignore ethics in reporting on the issue, relegating it to the spheres of public policy, medicine and law. Their joint studies also show that far greater numbers of men than women are quoted in stories on abortion and that a preponderance of men speak publicly for the anti-abortion side. In one study, Robert Lake and Judith Scrimger, who teach in the university's department of public relations, examined how abortion was covered in all 1986 editions of The Toronto Star, Toronto Sun and the Toronto edition of The Globe and Mail. Their other study analyzed editorials on abortion over 10 years (1977 to 1986) in The Globe, chosen "because it is the newspaper of the Canadian elites and is the only Canadian newspaper with pretensions to being national." Prof. Scrimger says they examined how the media handle the abortion issue to test a growing academic consensus that the mass media accept and promote the status quo in society, a theory contrary to the widespread public view that the media promote disorder and sensationalism. Proponents of the status-quo theory further hypothesize that the media are hostile to radical views that challenge the status quo. "We said, 'Okay, if we're theorizing that's the case, let's look at an issue that's going to be really difficult for the media to cover," she says. "Abortion does create some problems for the media, which are basically set in the liberal consensus . . . it inherently brings in radical positions because both extremes have clear views about what abortion means." The studies supported the theory that the media extol the virtues of the status quo and are agents of power, she said. All three papers "depend on the medical and legal professions and the politicians, the elites, as the main spokespeople who comment on this issue." With one exception, the role of ethicists in the abortion debate is absent in the newspapers, said Prof. Scrimger. "There are people trained in the matter of ethics in universities and other places who ponder these questions and yet (abortion) is rarely treated as an ethical issue . . . it's always treated as a public-policy and medical issue." Fewer pro-or anti-abortion activists are quoted over-all as spokespeople than are non-activists - such as medical and legal professionals and politicians. Such a balance supports the theory that the elite media support the establishment, according to Prof. Scrimger. "If you start looking at it as an ethical issue it could lead to some radical conclusions . . . and that would not fit into the role of the newspaper to propagandize the liberal consensus." The 10-year study showed The Globe paid the most attention to abortion. Profs Scrimger and Lake had predicted that finding because "as the newspaper of the economic, intellectual and political elites of Canada (The Globe) must pay more attention to abortion because of the elites' vested interest in the potential re-configuration of power." Of a total of 410 items about abortion, The Globe accounted for 199, compared to 104 in the Star and 107 in the Sun. "Since the power structure is dominated by males we hypothesized that males would be more frequently used as sources," said the professors. Indeed, of 760 people quoted as sources by the three papers in 1986, 512 were men and 248 were women. In all abortion articles in 1986, The Globe quoted women as sources proportionately less than the Star and the Sun. And in the 10-year study of 40 Globe editorials, the difference between male and female sources was much more striking. Of 66 people quoted, only eight were women. "We were somewhat surprised at the extent to which men were the primary sources," said Prof. Scrimger. In their Globe editorial study, Profs Lake and Scrimger concluded that it's not practical for a newspaper in the real world of journalism to educate readers about ethical considerations: "To examine this as an ethical problem risks splitting the newspaper's readership and perhaps the editorial board of The Globe and Mail as well. "To examine the issue ethically is a high-powered intellectual task and while this is certainly within the capacity of the editorial board of The Globe and Mail, it is difficult to explain in mundane, commonsense terms. . . "An examination of things ethically often leads to radical conclusions. The Globe and Mail has a final imperative. . . . One job of the press is to alleviate the need for further reflection and action by the reader. Thus there is little merit in stirring the ethical pot and much merit in freezing it." The professors concluded that The Globe editorials advocate a " moderately elitist, moderately reformist, moderately liberal, moderately reasonable abortion policy." They said any who view this stance with dismay should not direct their dismay at The Globe, as "a national newspaper's function in a capitalistic democracy is to seek and propagandize the liberal consensus." Prof. Scrimger said that despite major news stories about abortion such as the Chantal Daigle case, which occurred more recently than the years studied, she does not think the media's abortion coverage has changed. "I don't think the media change that dramatically, the media are to some degree a reflection of the social and political system." Copyright Deborah Jones 1990 About this website: Text and photos by Deborah Jones except where otherwise noted. Please contact me for reprint rights. All material copyrighted ../About.htmlshapeimage_1_link_0
Ignoring the ethics of abortion
Home    Report    Think    Explore    Essay    Play    About