Genetiği değiştirilmiş organizmalara ilişkin tartışmaların Türk basınında çerçevelenmesi

Son yıllarda genetiği değiştirilmiş organizmalar (GDO) Türkiye’de önemli bir tartışma konusu haline gelmiştir. Bu tartışmalarda hükümet, muhalefet, sivil toplum örgütleri ve tarım sektörü arasında fikir çatışmaları yaşanmış ve ilgili tarafların bakış açılarındaki farklılıklar doğrultusunda GDO, medyada çeşitli şekillerde çerçevelenmiştir. Bu doğrultuda çalışmanın temel amacı genetiği değiştirilmiş organizmalara ilişkin tartışmanın basında hangi çerçevelerle sunulduğunu ortaya koymaktır. Çalışmada, farklı bakış açılarına sahip Sabah, Hürriyet, Zaman ve Cumhuriyet gazetelerinin internet sitelerindeki arşivlerinde yapılan tarama sonucunda doğrudan konu ile ilgili toplam 368 habere ulaşılmış ve 368 haber ilk olarak çerçeve analizine temel oluşturması bakımından niceliksel olarak çözümlenmiştir. Ardından da çalışmanın amaçları doğrultusunda, mevcut çalışmalardan da hareketle oluşturulan haber çerçeveleri derinlemesine analiz edilmiştir. Sonuçta GDO’ya ilişkin haberlerde çoğunlukla denetim, risk ve politika çatışması çerçevelerinin kullanıldığı ortaya konulmuştur.

Framing the debates regarding to genetically modifield organisms in the Turkish press

In recent years, genetically modified organisms (GMO) have become an important discussion subject in Turkey. A clashing of ideas were seen between the government, the opposition, civil society organizations and the agricultural sector in these discussions, and GMO has been framed in different ways in the media according to the differences between the perspectives of the related parties. Accordingly, the basic purpose of the study is to reveal in which frames the discussions regarding genetically modified organisms were represented in the printed press. As a result of the survey of the archives in the internet sites of the newspapers Sabah, Hürriyet, Zaman and Cumhuriyet, who have different perspectives, a total of 368 news items directly related to the issue were found and these 368 items were first analyzed in terms of quantity in order to construct the base for the framing analysis. And later, pursuant to the purposes of the study, the news frames, established by setting off from existing studies, were analyzed in more depth. As a result, it is revealed that control, risk and policy conflict frames were used in the majority of the news items in regards to GMOs.

PDF

___

Augoustinos M, Crabb S ve Shepherd R (2010) Genetically Modified Food in the News: Media Representations of the Gm Debate in the UK, Public Understanding of Science, 19(1), 98- 114.
Bickerstaff K, Lorenzoni I, Pidgedon N F, Poortinga W ve Simmons P (2008) Reframing nuclear power in the UK Energy Debate: Nuclear Power, Climate Change Mitigation And Radioactive Waste, Public Understanding of Science, 17, 514-533.
Brasted M (2005) Framing protest: The Chicago Tribune and the New York Times during the 1968 democratic convention, Atlantic Journal of Communication, 13, 1-25.
Conrad P (2001) Genetic Optimism: Framing Genes and Mental Illness in the News, Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry, 25 (2), 225-247.
Cook G, Robbins P T ve Pieri E (2006) “Words of Mass Destruction”: British Newspaper Coverage of the Genetically Modified Food Debate, Expert and Non-Expert Reactions, Public Understanding of Science, 15 (1), 5-29.
de Vreese C H (2005) News Framing: Theory and Typology, Information Design Journal+Document Design, 13(1), 51-62.
Dağtaş E (2006) Türkiye’de Magazin Basını, Ütopya Yayınevi, Ankara.
Edy J A ve Meirick P C (2007) Wanted, Dead or Alive: Media Frames, Frame Adoption, and Support for the War in Afghanistan, Journal of Communication, 57 (1), 119-141.
Entman R M ve Rojecki A (1993) Freezing Out the Public: Elite and Media Framing of the U.S. Anti-Nuclear Movement, Political Communication, 10, 155-173.
Entman R M (1993) Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm, Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51-58.
Entman R M (1991) Framing U.S. Coverage of International News: Contrast in Narratives of the KAL and Iran Air Incidents, Journal of Communication, 41(4), 6-27.
Iyengar S (1989) How Citizens Think About National Issues: A Matter of Responsibility, American Journal of Political Science, 33 (4), November.
Listerman T (2010) Framing of Science Issues in Opinion-leading News: International Comparison of Biotechnology Issue Coverage, Public Understanding of Science, 19(1), 5-15.
Marks L A, Kalaitzandonakes N, Wilkins L ve Zakharova, L (2007) Mass Media Framing of Biotechnology News, Public Understanding of Science, 16 (2), 183-203.
Scheufele D A ve Tewksbury D (2007) Framing, Agenda Setting, and Priming: The Evolution of Three Media Effects Models, Journal of Communication, 57 (1), 9-20.
Scheufele D A (1999) Framing as a Theory of Media Effects, Journal of Communication, 103-122.
Schütz H ve Wiedamann P M (2008) Framing Effects on Risk Perception of Nanotechnology, Public Understanding of Science, 17 (3), 369- 379.
Simon A ve Xenos M (2000) Media Framing and Effective Public Deliberation, Political Communication, 17, 363-376.
Tiryaki İ ve Acar Z (2005) Genetik Yapısı Değiştirilmiş Bitkiler: Dünü, Bugünü ve Geleceği, OMÜ Zir. Fak. Derg, 20 (2), 121-126.
Van Gorp B V (2007) The Constructionist Approach to Framing: Bringing Culture Back In, Journal of Communication, 57 (1), 60-78.
Weaver D H (2007) Thoughts on Agenda Setting, Framing and Priming, Journal of Communication, 57, 142-147.
Zhou Y ve Moy P (2007) Parsing Framing Processes: The Interplay Between Online Public Opinion and Media Coverage, Journal of Communication, 57 (1), 79-98.