TY - JOUR
T1 - Groundhog Day in the emergency department
T2 - a systematic review of 20 years of news coverage in Australia
AU - Austin, Elizabeth E.
AU - Lanos, Nadia
AU - Hutchinson, Karen
AU - Barnes, Susan
AU - Pulido, Diana Fajardo
AU - Ruane, Colum
AU - Clay-Williams, Robyn
N1 - Copyright the Author(s) 2023. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.
PY - 2023/5/2
Y1 - 2023/5/2
N2 - This study examined how the Australian news media have portrayed public hospital Emergency Departments (EDs) over the last two decades. A systematic review and media frame analysis, searching Factiva and Australia and New Zealand News Stream for digital and print news articles published between January 2000 and January 2020. Eligibility criteria were (1) discussed EDs in public hospitals; (2) the primary focus of the article was the ED; (3) focused on the Australian context; (4) were published by one of the Australian state-based news outlets (e.g., The Sydney Morning Herald, Herald Sun). A pair of reviewers independently screened 242 articles for inclusion according to the pre-established criteria. Discrepancies were resolved via discussion. 126 articles met the inclusion criteria. Pairs of independent reviewers identified frames in 20% of the articles using an inductive approach to develop a framework for coding the remaining articles. News media rely heavily on reporting problems within and with the ED, while also proposing a cause. Praise for EDs was minimal. Opinions were primarily from government spokespeople, professional associations, and doctors. ED performance was often reported as fact, with no reference to the source of the information. Rhetorical framing devices, such as hyperbole and imagery, were used to emphasise dominant themes. The negative bias inherent in news media reporting of EDs could potentially damage public awareness of ED functioning, with implications for the likelihood of the public's accessing ED services. Like in the film Groundhog Day, news media reporting is stuck in a loop reporting the same narrative over and over again.
AB - This study examined how the Australian news media have portrayed public hospital Emergency Departments (EDs) over the last two decades. A systematic review and media frame analysis, searching Factiva and Australia and New Zealand News Stream for digital and print news articles published between January 2000 and January 2020. Eligibility criteria were (1) discussed EDs in public hospitals; (2) the primary focus of the article was the ED; (3) focused on the Australian context; (4) were published by one of the Australian state-based news outlets (e.g., The Sydney Morning Herald, Herald Sun). A pair of reviewers independently screened 242 articles for inclusion according to the pre-established criteria. Discrepancies were resolved via discussion. 126 articles met the inclusion criteria. Pairs of independent reviewers identified frames in 20% of the articles using an inductive approach to develop a framework for coding the remaining articles. News media rely heavily on reporting problems within and with the ED, while also proposing a cause. Praise for EDs was minimal. Opinions were primarily from government spokespeople, professional associations, and doctors. ED performance was often reported as fact, with no reference to the source of the information. Rhetorical framing devices, such as hyperbole and imagery, were used to emphasise dominant themes. The negative bias inherent in news media reporting of EDs could potentially damage public awareness of ED functioning, with implications for the likelihood of the public's accessing ED services. Like in the film Groundhog Day, news media reporting is stuck in a loop reporting the same narrative over and over again.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85159148530&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0285207
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0285207
M3 - Article
C2 - 37130103
AN - SCOPUS:85159148530
SN - 1932-6203
VL - 18
SP - 1
EP - 18
JO - PLoS ONE
JF - PLoS ONE
IS - 5 May
M1 - e0285207
ER -