Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journalism
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rankine, J.
Right arrow Articles by McCreanor, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Colonial Coverage

Media Reporting of a Bicultural Health Research Partnership

Jenny Rankine

jrankine{at}actrix.co.nz

Tim McCreanor

University of Aucklandt.mccreanor{at}auckland.ac.nz

Discursive and content analyses of media coverage of a 1998 Aotearoa/New Zealand partnership research project on the genetics of inherited stomach cancer show a decided preference for stories that depict the discoveries as the achievement of only one research partner, a genetics research team at Otago University. The coverage downplayed the major contribution of the genealogical research carried out by indigenous Maori researchers for families affected by the cancer. This contribution was included in a news release from the research funding agency, the Health Research Council of New Zealand. Through an array of discursive constructions and omissions, the media stories obscure the role of the Maori researchers in initiating and contributing to the genetics research and applying the findings of the overall project. We argue that what has been lost here is an opportunity to acknowledge and celebrate a major Maori contribution to international scientific advance and the health of people. Instead the media delivered another example of marginalizing colonial coverage of Maori achievement, denigrating existing work and potentially discouraging other such cutting-edge collaborative health research.

Key Words: colonialism • discursive analysis • genetics • indigenous research • Maori • marginalization • media • partnership • racism • representation • science

Journalism, Vol. 5, No. 1, 5-29 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/1464884904040397
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of Communication InquiryHome page
F. Dalisay
Social Control in an American Pacific Island: Guam's Local Newspaper Reports on Liberation
Journal of Communication Inquiry, July 1, 2009; 33(3): 239 - 257.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 JournalismHome page
S. Phelan
The newspaper as political antagonist: Editorial discourse and the othering of Maori perspectives on the foreshore and seabed conflict
Journalism, April 1, 2009; 10(2): 217 - 237.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 J Health PsycholHome page
R. Nairn, F. Pega, T. McCreanor, J. Rankine, and A. Barnes
Media, Racism and Public Health Psychology
J Health Psychol, March 1, 2006; 11(2): 183 - 196.
[Abstract] [PDF]