English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The media reporting of science has been under scrutiny for some decades now, and the importance of the mediating role of journalists in communicating complex issues to large, non-specialist audiences has become increasingly evident. Articles which appear in newspapers have a determining role in mass communication in society in general, and media popularizations remain one of the main ways in which science is communicated “outside the realm of science itself” (Calsamiglia and Van Dijk 2004: 371) to audiences who have little or no knowledge of the specialised fields in which this knowledge was generated. Over the last thirty years, discourse analysts have examined the reporting of issues as varied as climate change, food poisoning or vaccines, illustrating how institutional pressures within the media may lead to an imbalance or even systematic bias in reporting, which is often materialised through the selective use of specific information sources and the choice of discursive role allotted to different expert and non-expert voices within the text.

Narrative voice in popular science in the British press: a corpus analysis on the construal of attributed meanings