Moral injury refers to the psychological, social, functional, and spiritual impacts of experiencing an event that transgresses one's deeply held moral beliefs. Recent research has documented the relevance of moral injury among various occupations. This may be of particular applicability to journalists, who operate within ethically complex landscapes and often cover morally reprehensible events. This scoping review aimed to synthesize the existing literature concerning moral injury among journalists to explore (a) the extent to which research has been undertaken, (b) what potentially morally injurious events are experienced by journalists, and (c) how moral injury is measured and defined. Online databases were used to identify sources reporting on moral injury among journalists. A total of 20 articles met the inclusion criteria, with only 10 instances of empirical data on moral injury, highlighting a lack of empirical work in this field. Occupational support, mental health literacy, and avoiding potentially morally injurious events were highlighted as key protective and preventative factors. Future research would benefit from clearly conceptualizing moral injury in alignment with current theoretical frameworks and selecting measures that provide information about psychological experiences. Overall, these findings provide a foundation for improving understanding, awareness, intervention, and preventative strategies to support the mental health of journalists.
Using language models, we analyze a sample of 67 million tweets and 30 million Reddit comments from 2010 to 2023 from partisan users, journalists, and politicians. Our analysis focused on posts referencing at least one of 215 left- or right-leaning political entities, excluding those referencing entities on both sides. In this sample of posts, we found that estimates of outgroup animosity rose among partisan users, politicians, and journalists, with newer cohorts expressing higher levels of animosity than previous ones. Moreover, a small fraction of users is responsible for a disproportionate share of this negative content. We observe systematic differences in topic-level outgroup affect across political orientations: right-leaning users are twice as likely to exhibit outgroup animosity when discussing immigration, while left-leaning users show heightened outgroup animosity when discussing healthcare. On Twitter, U.S. politicians on the left exhibit more outgroup animosity than partisan users in our sample, but from 2017 to 2023, politicians on the right have experienced the sharpest rise in estimated outgroup animosity, surpassing journalists, media, and partisan users. On Reddit, a small number of communities account for a large share of polarizing rhetoric, with the rise and eventual ban of r/TheDonald significantly shaping trends in polarizing discourse among politically active right-leaning users.
Medical journalism is undergoing rapid renewal in a digital environment that accelerates discovery, conversation, and scrutiny across borders. Its purpose extends beyond transmitting facts, aiming to transform evidence into comprehension and comprehension into responsible action for individuals, institutions, and policy. Journalists curate credibility by verifying claims, contextualizing uncertainty, and translating complex study designs, while clinicians expand their societal role by communicating clearly beyond clinical settings. Collaboration between these communities strengthens public understanding and aligns scientific accuracy with narrative clarity, particularly when stakes are high. Ethical foundations remain central: accuracy, independence, transparency, respect for privacy, and avoidance of harm guide reporting choices that shape trust. Interpreting evidence requires attention to design quality, bias, effect size, and clinical relevance, presenting findings in plain language without sensational framing. Healthcare institutions and research centers must also act as reliable anchors within this ecosystem, providing transparent, verifiable data and methodological clarity to support responsible communication. The infodemic challenges all participants, as misinformation spreads quickly through emotionally charged content and algorithmic amplification that reward novelty over truth. Restoring trust calls for humility, timely corrections, consistent messages, and investment in media literacy for citizens and professionals. Artificial intelligence (AI) introduces powerful capabilities for discovery, summarization, personalization, and verification, yet also new risks such as hidden bias and synthetic content. A responsible medical media ecosystem demands shared literacy, collaborative practice, and ethical stewardship today. In this regard, medical communication must increasingly be regarded as a public good, sustained by the joint responsibility of journalists, clinicians, healthcare institutions, and citizens.
This paper explores the experiences of Muslim women in Canadian journalism. Through a critical discourse analysis of qualitative interviews with eight Muslim female journalists, this research elucidates their experiences with a gendered-religious nuance considering the specificities of gendered Islamophobia. It further moves past the established discourse of racialized women in media facing burdens of representation to examine how they unite their lived experience as Muslim women with journalism epistemology to challenge gendered Islamophobic discourses and unite Islamic values with journalistic practice. Drawing on theoretical frameworks like critical race theory and Orientalism, this research ultimately finds that the women challenge dominant discourses of objectivity in journalism and Islamophobic discourses surrounding Muslim women. They accomplish this by drawing on Islamic principles in their professional practice, ultimately contesting a key tenet of Islamophobic, Orientalizing discourse that establishes Islam as antithetical to Western values and Muslims as unable to integrate into increasingly secular Western society.
This article contends that meteorology endured a severe crisis in the USSR in 1972. During a devastating drought this year, meteorology lost its reliability as a science able to forecast the weather many weeks and months in advance. Many professional users turned to an alternative weather forecaster, Anatolii D'iakov, who predicted the weather for the next season by observing the sun. The argument made here is threefold. First, the fundamental reason for the crisis in long-range weather forecasting lies in the disruption of a bond of trust between meteorologists and the government, built on unfulfilled prospects of rapid and sudden, but unrealistic, progress in long-range forecasting to help agriculturalists of the steppe regions. Meteorologists could not fulfil the high expectations put in them. Second, journalists covering rural matters were instrumental in extolling D'iakov's alternative forecasts and in lambasting 'official' meteorology; however, they did not succeed in convincing the leadership to purge forecasters and reorganize meteorology. The meteorologists preserved their autonomy to deal with D'iakov. Third, the article reflects on the consequences of the failure of long-term forecasting for the status of science within Soviet governance and ideology.
暂无摘要（点击查看详情）
暂无摘要（点击查看详情）
This study considers a practice-based learning project in which 173 undergraduates enrolled in a journalism class reported on oral health issues in marginalized communities. Health fairs at local libraries provided a starting place for students to cover oral health care, an underreported topic in the media. Three nonprofit journalism organizations partnered with the effort to publish student-produced content. Through written responses from all students and 30 in-depth interviews with professional journalists, librarians, health professionals, and students, this qualitative case study presents a replicable community-centered intervention based on a journalism teaching hospital model that connects students with professionals and community stakeholders.
Accurate reporting of new findings is essential for an informed public, yet limited science literacy among journalists often results in misinterpretation of research, with costly societal and economic consequences. We developed a concise educational video that aimed to enhance journalists' science literacy through explaining important checkpoints for sound research reporting (funding, sample, statistics, causal claims, and visuals). The impact of this video was tested in a survey experiment with 260 German journalists. Treated participants produced correct headlines for 64% of study-based news stories versus 36% in the control group (a 28-percentage-point rise, P < 0.001). They also became more skeptical when evaluating existing articles, flagging more potential mistakes. An exploratory follow-up using 268 real-world articles suggests a reduction in factual mistakes by treated journalists. Our findings highlight that a brief, low-cost intervention can measurably improve the scientific accuracy of journalism, offering a scalable strategy for news organizations and training programs.
Local rural newspapers live a precarious existence in Alberta, Canada. In a declining economic situation, rural journalists have adopted unconventional practices to continue their work. Based on fieldwork in four communities, we show how rural journalists negotiate between the dominant metropolitan-based doxa and habitus of the journalistic field and their own position within communities. The analysis reveals rural-specific reporting practices, atypical business practices, and unconventional approaches to innovation. We argue that rural journalism is not merely a deviation from dominant metropolitan norms but a subfield actively redefining the boundaries of journalistic practice in response to economic precarity and community obligations.
A common assumption among scientists, journalists, and policymakers is that combating misinformation reliably changes behavior. However, the empirical evidence reveals that the belief-behavior association is often modest, variable, and context-dependent, raising critical questions about when and how to pursue belief versus behavior change. In this paper, we discuss the mechanisms by which beliefs influence behavior and the conditions under which addressing beliefs can change behavior. Specifically, we review the belief-to-behavior inference model, which proposes that beliefs influence behavior when (a) the belief is linked to a behavioral goal, (b) the inferential path from belief to behavior is relatively short, and (c) the belief-behavior association is preserved in memory. Our framework aligns intervention decisions with the cognitive architecture of belief-behavior correspondence and the intervention's goals, whether maximizing belief accuracy or behavioral impact. We also reviewed individual and social-structural interventions that are best suited for changing beliefs versus behavior, conceptually integrating interdisciplinary work on behavior change with the psychology of belief change.
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the challenges posed by the rapid spread of misinformation and disinformation, exacerbating societal polarization and institutional distrust. Understanding how misinformation and disinformation is understood and framed in public discourse is essential to developing strategies for building societal resilience and promoting informed decision-making during crises. This study explores the use of the terms misinformation and disinformation across Swiss public discourse during the COVID-19 pandemic, examining their framing within newspaper articles and social media interactions. The findings aim to inform policymakers and journalists or communicators on mitigating the societal impact of misinformation and disinformation through the promotion of a common understanding of the terms misinformation and disinformation. We analyzed 2 datasets using a natural language processing pipeline, including lemmatization, co-occurrence analysis, and semantic network mapping: media articles retrieved via Factiva and social media posts collected via CrowdTangle. The framing of misinformation and disinformation varied significantly across the datasets. News media highlighted its role in shaping public sentiment, often discussing the tension between journalistic integrity and the amplification of falsehoods. Social media exhibited polarized narratives, with discussions centered on conspiracy theories, distrust in institutions, and grassroots mobilization. Diverging narratives on the very concepts of misinformation and disinformation across public discourse reflect broader societal tensions. Robust journalistic integrity in the media and resilience strategies against misinformation and disinformation involving empowering publics through information literacy approaches are critical to bridging divides and reducing polarization.
When communicating messages about responsibility for mental health issues, media framing serves as an important source that can change public opinion and attention. This study examines how Japanese national newspapers framed causal and treatment responsibility in the coverage of depression over the past 15 years. Using a content analysis of 363 articles, this study analyzed how Japanese newspapers attribute responsibility for depression at the individual, social network, and societal levels. Results show that Japanese media attribute more causal responsibility to the social network level, and more treatment responsibility to the society level. Findings show that Japanese mass media consider the importance of social network-level factors in shaping health outcomes when framing responsibility. Comparisons between different newspapers in terms of their editorial stance influence how responsibility is framed. A significant difference was found in Yomiuri's right-leaning orientation, which helps explain why it attributed less responsibility for treatment to the societal level than Asahi and Mainichi. Findings hope to help public health practitioners and health journalists deliver more effective health communication and promote fairer access to mental health resources.
BACKGROUND: Effective public health communication during emergencies is critical for influencing behaviour and maintaining trust. Newspapers remain a key channel for disseminating institutional guidance, yet the extent to which their coverage aligns with international recommendations (e.g., World Health Organisation, WHO and Pan American Health Organisation, PAHO guidance) is not well established. Italy, the first European country to experience major COVID-19 outbreaks, provides a useful case for assessing the extent to which mainstream newspaper coverage aligned with WHO and PAHO recommendations for COVID-19 reporting. METHODS: A quali-quantitative, corpus-assisted discourse analysis was conducted on 5,621 articles (over 2.7 million words) published in seven major Italian newspapers and included in the national press review of the Italian National Institute of Health. Lexical and discursive patterns were examined using SketchEngine, combining quantitative keyword, collocation, and concordance analyses with qualitative close reading. Findings were compared against reporting recommendations issued by the WHO and the PAHO. RESULTS: Italian newspapers largely reflected key elements of WHO/PAHO guidance, emphasizing preventive measures, vaccine-related content, and reliance on expert and institutional sources (e.g., scientists, researchers, and public health professionals). However, recurrent use of non-people-first labels for affected individuals and occasional instances of “false balance” in vaccine coverage were also identified. CONCLUSIONS: Mixed corpus-based and qualitative approaches can support systematic assessment of newspaper reporting against WHO and PAHO recommendations for COVID-19 coverage. While many aspects of guideline-consistent reporting were observed, gaps remain in the use of non-stigmatising, people-first language and in evidence-weighted framing of scientific disagreement. Strengthening collaboration between journalists and public health institutions may support clear, ethical, and trustworthy communication in future emergencies.
Uncertainty represents one of the principal aspects of public debates concerning health issues, and it has been particularly prominent in the context of epidemics and pandemics. The mass media play an important role in shaping public perceptions, decision-making, and behaviour. This study examines how mass media in Czechia constructed and navigated uncertainties before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a focus on spatiotemporality. Through qualitative content analysis of 437 articles published in three online media, we move beyond research that typically treats uncertainty as a single, undifferentiated category, and systematically analyse distinct uncertainty frames and the spatiotemporal strategies through which journalists constructed, mitigated, or amplified uncertainty over time. Our analysis shows that journalistic accounts addressed uncertainties in both expert-knowledge and socio-economic domains. Moreover, we identify four key frames used in the journalistic accounts to construct and navigate uncertainty: marginalisation of uncertainty, recognition of uncertainty, management of uncertainty, and amplification of uncertainty. Our study has implications for studying vaccine hesitancy or health crises, as well as for further exploration of media framing of health-related uncertainty more broadly.
Despite growing alarm about the decline of democracy worldwide, assessing the extent to which democratic erosion is occurring and, perhaps more importantly, how it is happening is difficult because of data limitations at fine-grained levels of analysis. In this paper, we describe and demonstrate the utility of the Democratic Erosion Event Dataset (DEED), which tracks specific events related to democratic backsliding and authoritarian consolidation around the world, with coverage of 156 countries between 2000 and 2023. The data are publicly disseminated on our website for analysis across regions and over time. We describe the data generation process and validate the dataset by comparing it to complementary data sources. Finally, we discuss how DEED can be used by scholars, policymakers, and journalists to better understand not only if democratic erosion is happening but how the process unfolds.
Recent reports indicate that employees are being subjected to harassment on social media. However, research in this area is highly interdisciplinary, often existing in disciplines that cater to occupational groups, such as politicians, journalists, or education professionals. We therefore conducted a scoping review to synthesize research in this area. Our scoping review sought to identify (1) the nature of social media harassment towards employees, (2) specific risk factors, and (3) how organizations manage the problem. We conducted searches of the Web of Science and Scopus databases, alongside keyword searches of Google Scholar. Our approach aligned with PRISMA recommendations for conducting scoping reviews, and the searches produced 47 studies, of which 35 met the inclusion criteria. Analyses revealed the varied nature of social media harassment towards employees, reflected in the use of 14 different labels to describe social media harassment. Only five studies addressed risk factors for experiencing harassment, which included greater prominence and visibility, more active use of social media, and working in an organization where offline harassment occurs. Moreover, just six studies have examined organizational responses to the problem, and were largely seen as ineffective, although thirteen studies addressed how individuals coped with social media harassment. This is the first paper that reviews research on social media harassment directed at employees. To consolidate this research area, we offer suggestions aimed at reducing construct proliferation and promoting a more coherent research agenda.
Armed conflict not only disrupts health systems but reconfigures trust in vaccination and interactions with information. This study explored how the war in Ukraine has reshaped vaccine attitudes among parents living in Lviv, Ukraine and those displaced to Warsaw, Poland. Using a qualitative design, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 30 Ukrainian parents and 21 key informants, including healthcare workers, journalists, humanitarian actors and policy makers. Data were collected between November 2024 and March 2025 and analysed thematically to identify key patterns in how conflict and displacement influence trust and decision-making around childhood vaccination. Findings show that war and displacement disrupted continuity of care, with vaccination often deprioritised as families navigate documentation, housing and safety. Structural and language barriers further limited access, especially for displaced families. Yet, some parents described vaccination as a means to protect their children and reclaim their agency amid uncertainty, demonstrating active engagement with healthcare despite instability. Information practices were also reconfigured: digital platforms, particularly Telegram, became key spaces for seeking, sharing and interpreting information. Trust was shaped by perceived authenticity, responsiveness and emotional connection to information sources. This study highlights that access and vaccine confidence are mutually reinforcing. At the same time, efforts to sustain trust in vaccination must therefore go beyond focusing on information (and mis/disinformation) and draw on empathetic, transparent and participatory communication means. Strengthening continuity of care, empowering health workers and embedding community feedback mechanisms within humanitarian health responses are critical for sustaining confidence in vaccines in conflict settings.
Maternal mortality is a serious public health issue globally, with countries in West Africa facing some of the highest burdens. Media reportage of maternal deaths can have a significant influence on public health policy. We conducted a content analysis of digital media across the five Anglophone West African countries (The Gambia, Ghana, Liberia, Nigeria, and Sierra Leone) to understand what is reported about maternal deaths and how they are reported. Four to five widely read online newspapers and two of the most popular blogging sites from each country were selected. For each source, we searched for relevant articles, retrieving and including those with a detailed report of maternal death due to obstetric causes. Following data extraction, we used quantitative and qualitative analyses, using the three-delay model and a derived standards checklist based on the Principles of the Association of Health Care Journalists and the Impress Standards Code for coding, respectively. Inter-coder reliability was assessed for quantitative analysis, and audit trail and debriefing conducted for qualitative analysis. Fifty-three detailed articles, consisting of 35 online newspaper articles (61%) and 16 blogs (30%), were included. Most were published in 2023 (30%) and in Nigeria (75%). Delays in facilities, including negligence, malpractice, long waiting times, and withholding care contingent on payment, were frequently mentioned. All articles distinguished fact from opinion, and authors avoided taking a side, 90% were respectful, 68% captured >1 perspective, with most capturing perspectives of the spouse and the government; however, only 6% consulted independent experts. Overall, media reportage of maternal deaths in Anglophone West Africa confirms existing and offers new insights. Preservation of the dignity and respect of pregnant women in death; engagement of multiple voices, including independent experts, and inclusion of actions being undertaken or required to prevent future occurrences will improve reporting and its utility for policy change.
Nurses' involvement in public and policy debates is increasingly recognised as essential for shaping health care systems, yet their voices remain largely invisible. When nurses do engage publicly, they may act as public opinion leaders, using their professional expertise and credibility to influence policy discussions. Little is known, however, about how public opinion leadership (POL) manifests in practice and what motivates nurses to take on such a role. A proposed health care reform in the Netherlands, known as the BIG2 proposal, triggered an unexpected wave of nurses speaking up in national media and on social platforms. This study explores how POL manifested during this reform and what motivated nurses to raise their voices. A qualitative design was used, combining a thematic and abductive approach. Twelve semi-structured interviews were conducted with Dutch nurses who publicly responded to the reform through newspapers or social media. The findings show that nurses who engaged in POL acted from moral conviction and professional credibility, rather than formal authority. Their motivation stemmed from feeling misunderstood or undervalued, which evoked emotions such as frustration and anger. Responsibility, encouragement, and solidarity sustained their engagement. Nurses used social and traditional media to connect with peers, journalists, and politicians, making their leadership visible and collective. POL appeared as a collective process grounded in moral conviction, professional expertise, and mutual support. These findings highlight how nurses can extend their influence beyond clinical settings and contribute to shaping health policy debates.