This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Plein, L. C. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Popularizing Biotechnology: The Influence of Issue Definition

University of Missouri-Columbia

In recent years, the image of biotechnology has been transformed from one of danger and uncertainty to one of opportunity and familiarity. This article explores the process of issue definition by examining the efforts of private interests and public officials. An analysis of interview data, public documents, and other sources reveals four methods of issue definition: (1) establishing the "biotechnology industry" as a collective voice, (2) forging alliances with established public and private interests, (3) associating biotechnology with popular issues on the policy agenda, and (4) discrediting opponents and critics of biotechnology. These methods of issue definition reveal the importance not only of defining a specific issue but also of influencing the context in which it is considered.

Science, Technology & Human Values, Vol. 16, No. 4, 474-490 (1991)
DOI: 10.1177/016224399101600403


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. Fennell Marketing Science: The Corporate Faces of Genetic Engineering Journal of Communication Inquiry, January 1, 2009; 33(1): 5 - 26. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Lassen and A. Jamison Genetic technologies meet the public: the discourses of concern. Science Technology Human Values, January 1, 2006; 31(1): 8 - 28. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. W. Bauer Arenas, Platforms, and the Biotechnology Movement Science Communication, December 1, 2002; 24(2): 144 - 161. [Abstract] [PDF]

				N. Brown and M. Michael Switching between Science and Culture in Transpecies Transplantation Science Technology Human Values, January 1, 2001; 26(1): 3 - 22. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. Davison, I. Barns, and R. Schibeci Problematic Publics: A Critical Review of Surveys of Public Attitudes to Biotechnology Science Technology Human Values, July 1, 1997; 22(3): 317 - 348. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Schibeci, I. Barns, S. Kennealy, and A. Davison Public attitudes to gene technology: the case of the MacGregor's(R) tomato Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 1997; 6(2): 167 - 183. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. H. PRIEST Structuring Public Debate on Biotechnology: Media Frames and Public Response Science Communication, December 1, 1994; 16(2): 166 - 179. [Abstract] [PDF]

				I. Rabino How European and U.S. Genetic Engineering Scientists View the Impact of Public Attention on Their Field: A Comparison Science Technology Human Values, January 1, 1994; 19(1): 23 - 46. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Hornig Reading risk: public response to print media accounts of technological risk Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 1993; 2(2): 95 - 109. [Abstract] [PDF]