the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
How frames and narratives in press releases shape newspaper science articles: the case of ocean plastic pollution.
Abstract. Although framing of scientific topics in the media has been widely studied, relatively little is known about the origins of these frames. Since (geo)science journalism often relies on university press releases, this study investigates how peer-reviewed research on ocean plastic is framed in university press releases and newspaper articles. Using Entman's framing theory, we examine how ocean plastic science is described through problem definitions, causes, moral judgments and solutions. Additionally, we studied narrative elements like personalisation, dramatisation, and emotionalisation. Using a novel visualisation technique, we combine quantitative and qualitative analysis to reveal shifts in content and show which information is added, adapted or omitted by journalists when covering the research in the newspaper. Our results show that journalists often adopt framing and quotes directly from press releases, with scientists consistently portrayed as central figures, either as heroes addressing the plastic crisis or as warners highlighting its dangers. Although some articles add additional context, especially in assigning responsibility, the social embedding of the problem remains limited, resulting in personalisation of the science instead of ocean plastic pollution. Information in the press release is almost never validated by a scientist not involved in the study. Moreover, non-scientific actors are rarely brought up and perspectives of victims or causers are often missing. These findings demonstrate that press releases strongly shape how ocean plastic research is framed in the media, offering research institutes an opportunity to promote more socially contextualised and relevant ocean science communication.
- Preprint
(1240 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 24 Jul 2025)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-2216', Anna Heerdink, 16 Jun 2025
reply
Thank you for the opportunity to review this manuscript. You’ve done a great job demonstrating how the frames and narratives used in press releases can shape subsequent newspaper coverage. This study makes a timely and valuable contribution to the existing literature, and your writing is both clear and well grounded in prior research. To help clarify your findings, I’ve provided a few section-by-section suggestions below. I hope you find them useful as you refine your manuscript.
Abstract and Introduction
The abstract clearly presents the main findings and their significance. The introduction clearly explains the different challenges that readers and journalists face when learning about ocean science.
- In paragraph 1.1, split the challenges faced by the general public (e.g., need for prior knowledge, complex methods, physical distance) from those faced by journalists (e.g., limited scientist access, interpreting findings) into two separate paragraphs for greater clarity.
Theoretical Framework
You’ve defined the key concepts: framing, narrative use, overall tone, and actor roles, well.
- In Section 2.1 you explain the concept of frame-building elements but don’t discuss the effects frames can have on readers. (You do cover these effects in Sections 2.2 and 2.3 when discussing narratives and story tone.) After defining frame-building elements in Section 2.1, include a brief overview of how frames influence readers’ perceptions and interpretations.
Methods
The coding process is described clearly.
- Please specify the timeframe during which the press releases and articles were published.
- You note that inter-coder reliability for the stylistic elements did not reach an acceptable threshold. It may be cleaner to drop those elements from the analysis.
Results
Figures 1–3 contain a lot of information. They’re informative but require time to interpret.
- You coded 38 elements (frame variables, narrative elements, actors, actor roles) but analyzed only 10 press releases. In the Results or Limitations section, discuss whether this sample size provides a sufficient basis for assessing all 38 coded elements.
- In line 315, you refer to “press.” I think you meant “press release.”
- For framing and for actors, you report the number of articles that mirror, add to, or omit elements compared to the press release. Please include similar counts for the narrative elements.
Conclusions and Discussion
You link your results back to theory, suggest ways for journalists and scientists to improve communication, and identify the study’s limitations and avenues for future research.
- The structure of the Discussion does not mirror the order of the theoretical framework and Results. Reordering the Discussion subsections to follow frame-building, narratives, then actors would improve logical flow.
- You mention article length in several places but do not integrate it fully into your findings. Either expand the analysis of length to show how it affects your results or remove those mentions if they do not support your main argument.
- You cannot be certain that press releases alone drive the framing of news articles, journalists may also draw on other sources. Please address this possibility in the Limitations section.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2216-RC1
Data sets
All coded frame and narrative variables, qualitative dataset Aike Vonk https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15389206
Codebook to code frame and narrative variables in ocean plastic science reporting Aike Vonk https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15389206
Visual summary describing dataset construction Aike Vonk https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15389206
Model code and software
The Python script that created all images and the script that calculated the Jaccard Index Erik van Sebille https://github.com/erikvansebille/QualitativeDataVisualization/tree/main
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
106 | 61 | 5 | 172 | 6 | 3 |
- HTML: 106
- PDF: 61
- XML: 5
- Total: 172
- BibTeX: 6
- EndNote: 3
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1