The paradoxical reliance on allopathic medicine and positivist science among skeptical audiences.
A number of studies have found an association between what people see, hear and read in the mass media and their corresponding actions and beliefs. This link has been demonstrated both at the micro and at the macro levels of analysis. However, when people are asked directly about the impact of mass media they tend to deny that they are personally affected. In fact, they tend to describe themselves as critical and skeptical media consumers. The purpose of this paper is to explore this contradiction through 12 in-depth focus group discussions undertaken in Ontario, Canada in 2004. Findings from the focus group interviews confirm earlier research in that people claimed that they were not susceptible to media influence. At the same time as they said that they took information from the mass media "with a grain of salt", they articulated sophisticated and nuanced accounts of how and why they evaluated some information as good and some as bad. In general they evaluated media stories on the basis of the values of allopathic medicine and positivistic science. Moreover, in the context of the focus groups and their explicit comments on their skepticism, they discussed health information from the magazine articles that they were given to read (on either HIV/AIDS, Alzheimer's disease, or a heart disease). Possible explanations for these paradoxical findings are discussed.
Clarke
Juanne N
JN
Wilfrid Laurier University Waterloo, Ont. Canada. jclarke@wlu.ca
Arnold
Stephanie
S
Everest
Michelle
M
Whitfield
Kyle
K
D001294:Attitude to Health; D000529:Complementary Therapies; D017144:Focus Groups; D006801:Humans; D007407:Interviews as Topic; D008402:Mass Media; D009864:Ontario; D011639:Public Opinion