Abstract

Given the scholarly neglect of visuals in health risk reporting, it remains unclear what types of visuals predominate in news coverage and why journalists choose to use them. Generating knowledge on this neglected part of journalistic work should facilitate a more comprehensive understanding of health risk reporting and its impact on society. In 2020 we conducted two studies with this goal in mind: a content analysis of visuals in the coverage of a recent E. coli outbreak in Germany (N = 200) and a survey of German health journalists (N = 49). Study 1 showed that visuals were mostly used to illustrate the presumed causes of the outbreak and recommended treatments. Study 2 presented visuals epitomising each of the frame functions identified in Study 1 to health reporters and asked for their views. Our findings revealed that journalists preferred images that involve health severity, medical aspects, and reassurance, but said that they disliked thematic and uncertainty frames. They reported using multiple visuals to fulfil several framing functions. Finally, Study 2 exposed important differences between journalists’ perceptions of visuals’ functions and the way scholars typically conceive them. Taken together, these studies suggest that health risk reporting may be better than its reputation, and that incorporating visuals into assessments of journalistic quality may challenge the typical criticism in a way impossible when merely evaluating the verbal component of news.

摘要

鉴于学术上忽视健康风险报道中的视觉效果，目前尚不清楚哪些类型的视觉效果在新闻报道中占主导地位，以及为什么记者选择使用它们。就新闻工作中这一被忽视的部分产生知识应该有助于更全面地了解健康风险报道及其对社会的影响。2020 年，我们怀着这一目标进行了两项研究：对德国最近爆发的大肠杆菌疫情报道中的视觉内容分析（N = 200）和对德国卫生记者的调查（N= 49)。研究 1 表明，视觉效果主要用于说明爆发的假定原因和推荐的治疗方法。研究 2 向健康记者展示了体现研究 1 中确定的每个框架功能的视觉效果，并征求他们的意见。我们的调查结果显示，记者更喜欢涉及健康严重程度、医疗方面和保证的图像，但表示他们不喜欢主题和不确定性框架。他们报告说使用多种视觉效果来实现多种取景功能。最后，研究 2 揭示了记者对视觉功能的看法与学者通常设想它们的方式之间的重要差异。综上所述，这些研究表明，健康风险报告可能比其声誉更好，