Deconstructing cancer: what makes a good-quality news story?

Amanda J Wilson, Billie Bonevski, Alison L Jones and David A Henry
Med J Aust 2010; 193 (11): 702-706.


Objective: To describe an in-depth analysis of the content and quality of stories about new cancer interventions in Australian media.

Design and setting: Search of the Media Doctor Australia media-monitoring website for stories about newly reported cancer interventions, including drugs, diagnostic tests, surgery and complementary therapies, that had been collected from June 2004 to June 2009 and rated for quality using a validated rating instrument. A mixed-methods approach was used to analyse data and story content. Data from the website on stories about other new health interventions and procedures were compared.

Main outcome measures: Differences in quality scores between cancer-related news stories (“cancer stories”) and other stories, and between types of media outlet; differences in how cancer was reported in terms of cancer type, morbidity, mortality, and in the use of hyperbole and emotive language.

Results: 272 unique cancer stories were critically reviewed by Media Doctor Australia. Cancer stories had significantly higher scores for quality than other stories (F = 7.1; df = 1; P = 0.008). Most cancer stories concerned disease affecting the breast or prostate gland, with breast cancer appearing to be over-represented as a topic relative to its incidence. Pairwise comparisons showed statistically significant superiority for broadsheet newspaper stories over online stories (F = 12.7; df = 1; P < 0.001) and television stories (F = 10.7; df = 1; P = 0.001). Descriptions of morbidity and mortality were variable and often confusing in terms of numbers, time periods and locations. Literary devices including hyperbole and emotive language were used extensively, mostly by the researchers.

Conclusions: While reporting of cancer in the general media is of low quality, many of the poorer aspects of content are directly attributable to the researchers. Researchers and journals need to do more to ensure that a higher standard of information about cancer is presented to the media.

  • Amanda J Wilson1
  • Billie Bonevski2,3
  • Alison L Jones4
  • David A Henry5

  • 1 School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW.
  • 2 Centre for Health Research and Psycho-oncology, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW.
  • 3 Cancer Council New South Wales, Sydney, NSW.
  • 4 University of Western Sydney, Sydney, NSW.
  • 5 Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.


We thank the Media Doctor reviewers for their time and expertise.

Competing interests:

None identified.

  • 1. Atkin CK, Smith SW, McFeters C, Ferguson V. A comprehensive analysis of breast cancer news coverage in leading media outlets focusing on environmental risks and prevention. J Health Commun 2008; 13: 3-19.
  • 2. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Cancer in Australia: a snapshot, 2004–05. Canberra: ABS, 2006. (ABS Cat. No. 4822.0.55.001.)
  • 3. Clarke JN, Everest MM. Cancer in the mass print media: fear, uncertainty and the medical model. Soc Sci Med 2006; 62: 2591-2600.
  • 4. Chen X, Siu LL. Impact of the media and the internet on oncology: survey of cancer patients and oncologists in Canada. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 4291-4297.
  • 5. Wilson PM, Booth AM, Eastwood A, Watt IS. Deconstructing media coverage of trastuzumab (Herceptin): an analysis of national newspaper coverage. J R Soc Med 2008; 101: 125-132.
  • 6. Lewison G, Tootell S, Roe P, Sullivan R. How do the media report cancer research? A study of the UK’s BBC website. Br J Cancer 2008; 99: 569-576.
  • 7. Smith DE, Wilson AJ, Henry DA, media doctor study group. Monitoring the quality of medical news reporting: early experience with media doctor. Med J Aust 2005; 183: 190-193. <MJA full text>
  • 8. Bonevski B, Wilson A, Henry DA; media coverage of complementary and alternative medicine. PLoS One 2008; 3: e2406.
  • 9. Wilson A, Bonevski B, Jones A, Henry D. Media reporting of health interventions: signs of improvement, but major problems persist. PLoS One 2009; 4: e4831.
  • 10. Wilson A, Roberston J, McElduff P, et al. Does it matter who writes medical news stories? PloS Med 2010; 7: e1000323.
  • 11. Cassels A, Lexchin J. How well do Canadian media outlets convey medical treatment information? Initial findings from a year and a half of media monitoring by Media Doctor Canada. Open Medicine 2008; 2 (2): 20-23.
  • 12. Schwitzer G. How do US journalists cover treatments, tests, products, and procedures? An evaluation of 500 stories. PLoS Med 2008; 5: e95.
  • 13. Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. 2nd ed. London: Sage Publications, 1998.
  • 14. Australian Press Council. Reporting guidelines. (General press release No. 245.) Sydney: APC, April 2001.
  • 15. Lupton D. Medicine as culture: illness, disease and the body in Western societies. 2nd ed. London: Sage Publications, 2003.
  • 16. Wallis P, Nerlich B. Disease metaphors in new epidemics: the UK media framing of the 2003 SARS epidemic. Soc Sci Med 2005; 60: 2629-2639.
  • 17. Sontag S. Illness as metaphor and AIDs and its metaphors. 1st Anchor Books ed. New York: Doubleday, 1990.
  • 18. MacKenzie R, Chapman S, Barratt A, Holding S. “The news is [not] all good”: misrepresentations and inaccuracies in Australian news media reports on prostate cancer screening. Med J Aust 2007; 187: 507-510. <MJA full text>
  • 19. Chapman S, Nguyen TN, White C. Press-released papers are more downloaded and cited. Tob Control 2007; 16: 71.
  • 20. Avery EJ, Lariscy RW, Sohn Y. Public information officers’ and journalists’ perceived barriers to providing quality health information. Health Commun 2009; 24: 327-336.
  • 21. Woloshin S, Schwartz LM. Press releases: translating research into news. JAMA 2002; 287: 2856-2858.
  • 22. Woloshin S, Schwartz LM, Casella SL, et al. Press releases by academic medical centers: not so academic? Ann Intern Med 2009; 150: 613-618.
  • 23. Woloshin S, Schwartz LM, Kramer BS. Promoting healthy skepticism in the news: helping journalists get it right. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009; 101: 1596-1599.


remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Responses are now closed for this article.