Human genetics, genetic disorders, and genetic cloning in scholarly literature

Genetics & the Media

Human Genetics

Author's note with contact information and more details on collegiate affiliation, etc.

Human genetics is a modern issue that moves from the forefront to the background of our global culture. It is not only a scientific endeavor, but it is also an activity laden with political implications, as well as a business opportunity for the media. Human genetics and human cloning become more accessible issues because the practice influences the average citizen more so than before, with or without the average citizen's knowledge. What the average person knows about human genetics and human cloning has been increased and influenced by media representations. The paper will focus on an article that questions the interest of genetic research in the mind of the general public as well as considers why human genetics and human cloning are media-worthy at all.

Article Review: Genetics & the Media

The authors of article are concerned with the media interest in human genetics. The authors are very much concerned with the media representations of human genetics and human cloning. They wish to understand why the media is so curious about this issue as well as the motivations and/or agendas behind all the press attention. The authors coin a phrase for the media attention regarding genetics: "genohype." They imply that the media has infected the general public with genohype as a way to sway public opinion, which could affect elections and legislation regarding the issues.

In the article, the authors propose that genohype overexaggerates the benefits and the risks of human genetics and human cloning. They suggest that this overexaggeration and oversaturation of the issue in the media does not keep the public informed. Bubela and Caufield argue that what the media does is actually keep the public from participating thoughtfully and accurately in discussion surrounding human genetics and human cloning. The media does not accurately communicate the current research trends or the applications. Instead of appealing to the media consumer's intellect, the media manipulates the media consumer's emotions.

Bubela and Caufield provide examples from various studies that track the inaccuracies regarding human genetics in the media. They observed the repetition of certain keywords or phrases on broadcasts. They decided to narrow their search parameters to print media, focusing on medical journals, newspaper articles, and scientific journals. They found that an expert wrote less than a quarter of the print media examined. A great deal of the media was very brief, as a sort of announcement with little description and no analysis provided. Within the articles scanned, the authors located biases toward what areas of human genetics were reported. They found an uneven distribution of topics concerning genetics, heavily favoring behavioral and neurogenetics. They claim this disparity skews the public view of the issues by not providing a wide enough context within which consumers can consider and decided upon the issues. Bubela and Caufield also contend that the bias shown in regard to topic coverage is hyped or exaggerated in the first place.

While the authors made bold statements and provided compelling results, they were very much aware of the limitations of their study. They did not include print media such as tabloids, which may have higher circulation rates that the "respectable," normative newspapers they used in their study. They are also aware that peer-reviewed journal articles, papers from conferences, etc., were also not included and would have redirected the study results if they had been included.

Bubela and Caufield wrote this article to generate awareness in the reader. The intended audience for this article could be members of the media community, members of the genetics community, and the average citizen. This issue, like many other issues, requires an extra effort in order to understand it clearly. Consumers cannot rely on the only on the media to provide facts or descriptions of an issue. Particularly in the information and technological age in which we occupy currently, there is more accessibility to information that can ultimately empower the consumer.

Human genetics and human cloning is not an issue that will soon dissipate from the public consciousness. It is an issue that will mature in time, as should humanity, hopefully. When we understand which factors contribute to what information is spread, we can choose our sources for information with more consideration and care. This is an issue that will continually affect the everyday person. It is vital that people are well informed to make firm decisions in which they feel confident. The article does a sound job of awakening the reader to conditions surrounding genetics and media journalism in general. Consumers must keep in mind what bits of information they receive and also reflect upon the details that have been left out. It is a condition of the 21st century world.