- Environment/ecology (17%)
- Biology (11%)
- Earth science (8%)
- Technology (8%)
- Physics (4%)
- Public understanding of science (3%)
- Chemistry (1%)
These results need to be set against the percentage of science-related stories found in UK newspapers overall. One of the newspaper articles covered by the 2003 survey contained the following observation: ‘The ratio of ‘arts’ to ‘science’ writers on most broadsheets is still something in the region of 20:1. It’s very rare for serious science stories to fight their way on to front pages.’ ‘There is no escaping the fact that science is a difficult thing to cover. Any half-trained reporter can hammer out a story on child poverty, immigration or archaeology. It’s rather more difficult to attempt something on superstrings, RNA interference, or nanotechnology’
3.
This comment is supported by the findings of the Science Museum Media Monitor1 that, between 1946 and 1990, science stories occupied only around 5% of the total space in UK newspapers. Similar levels of science coverage were found elsewhere; Greek newspapers contained 2% science stories
4; US newspapers contained 2%
5; and the Australian press, 2.9% of science-related stories
6. Most of these surveys also found the high level of medical/health coverage identified in the UK surveys
1,4,5, while the Italian press also showed high levels of biomedical coverage
7.
Of course ‘quality’ newspapers are only one of the media outlets available today, and the balance of science stories appearing elsewhere in the media, such as on the radio, Internet or TV, may reveal a different story. However, a survey of European TV coverage found that only 8% of stories (218/2676) were science-related
8, a similar coverage to the 5% in UK newspapers, reported above.