Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-30T21:28:46.008Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What it says in the papers: an audit

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2014

Alison O'Connor  and
Patricia Casey
Alison O'Connor
Affiliation:
University College Dublin, Department of Psychiatry, Mater Hospital, 63 Eccles St, Dublin 7, Ireland
Patricia Casey
Affiliation:
University College Dublin, Department of Psychiatry, Mater Hospital, 63 Eccles St, Dublin 7, Ireland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: There have been concerns in the international literature that the manner in which psychiatry and psychiatric patients is portrayed in the print media is negative and sensational. If correct this has serious implications for the stigma and prejudice that our patients will suffer. This study was designed to evaluate the content and tone of articles relating to psychiatry. It was compared with a broadly similar study published in 1995 and will form the base from which to measure changes in psychiatric coverage over time.

Method: All the daily broadsheets, one daily tabloid and three Sunday broadsheets were examined for a six month period in 1999 and all articles, letters or headlines incorporating psychiatry-related material were examined. Using specific definitions, articles and headlines were examined for tone and content as well as for the contribution of mental health professionals.

Results: Overall 0.65 articles per newspaper per day were found. News items and feature predominated, with forensic issues receiving the greatest attention. The tone of the articles was either neutral or positive and the improvement in the tone of articles in the tabloids was particularly noticeable when compared with an earlier study. This is very different from the findings of international studies. However, the headlines were more sensational in tone than the contents of the articles themselves. Increasingly the opinion of health professionals was sought but contributions from psychiatrists remained low, writing just two articles and constituting 15% of health professionals whose opinions were sought. Nine per cent of items constituted misuse of terms.

Conclusions: The Irish print media are not hostile to psychiatry and there has been an improvement in tone and type of article in the past five years. Greater involvement of psychiatrists in the media and particularly more direct engagement with editors is required if there is to be a shift from coverage of forensic matters in favour of informative articles as well as improvement in the headline tone.

Keywords

MediaNewspapersPrejudicePsychiatric disordersEditors
Type
Audits
Information
Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , June 2001 , pp. 68 - 71
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.McCall, M, Stocking, S. Between scientists and the public. Am Psychol 1982; 37: 985–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Wahl, O, Roth, R. Television images of mental illness: results of a metropolitan Washington media watch. J Broadcasting 1982; 26: 599–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Day, DM, Page, S. Portrayal of mental illness in Canadian newspapers. Can J Psychiat 1986; 31, 813–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Matas, M, El-Guebaly, N, Harper, D. Mental Illness and the media: Part II. Content Analysis of press coverage of mental health topics. Canadian Journal of psychiatry. 1986; 31: 813–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Nunally, JC. 1961. Popular conceptions of Mental Health: their development and change. New York: Reinhart and Winston.Google Scholar
6.Hillert, A, Sandmann, J, Ehmig, SCet al. The general public's cognitive and emotional perception of mental illness; an alternative to attitude research. In The Image of Madness; The Public Facing Mental Illness and Psychiatric Treatment EDS. Guimon, J, Fischer, W, Sartorius N Basel, Karger, 1999.Google Scholar
7.Scott, J. What the papers say. Psychiatric Bulletin. 1994; 18: 489–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Meagher, D., Newman, A., Fee, M. and Casey, P. 1995. The coverage of psychiatry in the print media. Psychiatric Bulletin. 19, 642–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Browne, V. Protecting the rights of the most vulnerable. Irish Times. Aug. 11th, 1999.Google Scholar
10.Salter, M, Byrne, P. The stigma of mental illness. How can you use the media to reduce it? Psychiatric Bulletin 2000; 24; 281–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Irish Division of the Royal College of Psychiatrists and National Union of Journalists. Oct. 1999. Guide for Journalists and Broadcasters reporting on Schizophrenia. Eli Lily, Ireland.Google Scholar
12.Statistical Package for the Social Science. 1998. SPSS inc. Chicago.Google Scholar
13.Barnes, RC, Earnshaw, S. Mental illness in British newspapers (or my girlfriend is a Rover Metro). Psychiatric Bulletin 1993; 17: 673–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Dr.MacKenzie, KWho? Psychiatric Bulletin 1994; 18: 231–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Nairn, R. Does the use of psychiatrists as sources of information improve media depictions of mental illness? A pilot study. Australia and New Zealand J Psychiat 1999; 33(4): 583–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Benkert, O, Graf-Morgenstern, M, Hillert, Aet al. Public opinion on psychotropic drugs: an analysis of the factors influencing acceptance or rejection. J Nervous Mental Diseases. 1997; 185(3): 151–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Sonneck, S, Etzersdorfer, E, Nagel-Jones, S. Subway suicide in Vienna (1980–1990): a Contribution to the Imitation Effect in Suicidal Behaviour. In: Suicidal Behaviour in Europe. Recent Research Findings. Eds. Crepet, P, Ferrari, G, Platt, S, Bellini, MRome. John LibbeyCIC srl, 1992.Google Scholar