Professional Documents
Culture Documents
MODIGLIANI, A GAMSON, W. Media Discourse and Public Opinion On Nuclear Power - A Constructionist Approach
MODIGLIANI, A GAMSON, W. Media Discourse and Public Opinion On Nuclear Power - A Constructionist Approach
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
American Journal of Sociology.
http://www.jstor.org
Media Discourse and Public Opinion
on Nuclear Power: A Constructionist
Approach'L
WilliamA. Gamson
Boston College
AndreModigliani
UniversityofMichigan
1 The researchreported
herehas beensupportedbytheNationalScienceFoundation
grantsSES-801642and SES-8309343.We hadhelpfulcomments onearlierdrafts
from
WilliamHoynes,Elihu Katz, SharonKurtz,CharlotteRyan, Howard Schuman,
David Stuart,and theanonymous reviewers.Requestsforreprintsshouldbe sentto
WilliamA. Gamson,Department ofSociology,BostonCollege,ChestnutHill,Massa-
chusetts02167.
? 1989byThe University
ofChicago.All rightsreserved.
0002-9602/90/9501-0001$01
.50
2
Nuclear Power
3
AmericanJournalof Sociology
4
Nuclear Power
5
AmericanJournalof Sociology
6
Nuclear Power
7
AmericanJournalof Sociology
8
Nuclear Power
9
AmericanJournalof Sociology
10
Nuclear Power
8
Fora copyofthecompletecodeused,writetothefirstauthor.Further detailson the
sampling,compiling,
and codingprocessand thereliabilities
involvedarepresented in
Gamsonand Modigliani(1987,pp. 171-74).
11
AmericanJournalof Sociology
12
Nuclear Power
to produceforhumankind"morecomforts,moreleisure,betterhealth,
moreofreal freedom[and] a muchhappierlife"(Waymack1947,p. 214).
AtomicEnergyCommission(AEC) chairmanLewis Strausscontributed
a phrasethatbecame a permanentpartof theissue culturewhenhe told
the National Associationof Science Writersin 1954 that "It is not too
much to expect that our childrenwill enjoy in theirhomes electrical
energytoo cheap to meter."
Not all thediscoursethatBoyerreviewswas equallyoptimistic.There
were certainlycautiousskepticschallengingthe utopianclaims. But this
is a debate withina frame,a disagreement overhow fastand how easily
the promiseof nuclear energywill be realized. As long as the issue is
framedas a choicebetweenatomsforwar and atomsforpeace, it is hard
to see who could be againstnuclearpowerdevelopment.
Nuclear dualismremainedessentiallyunchallengedforthe nextquar-
tercentury.On December 8, 1953, PresidentEisenhoweraddressedthe
United Nations on nuclearpower, presentingwhat media discoursela-
beled his "atomsforpeace" speech.In it, he proposedto make American
nuclear technologyavailable to an internationalagencythat would at-
temptto develop peacefuluses of nuclearenergy.
We sampledmedia materialforthetwo weeksaftertheUN speechand
fora similarperiodin February1956,followingtheissuanceofa citizens
committeereporton the futureof nuclear energy.9The Eisenhower
speech came at the heightof the Cold War and in the midst of the
McCarthyera. Much of the discoursethatfollowedfocusedless on nu-
clear power and more on how Eisenhower'scleverone-upmanshiphad
embarrassedan obstructionist and militaristic
Soviet Union. Neverthe-
less, we were able to identify21 columns, 16 cartoons,and 4 news-
magazineaccountsthatdid addressthe issue of nuclearpowerper se.10
The progresspackage remainsunchallengedthroughout thissampleof
materials.The either/or structureof nucleardualism is stronglyrepre-
sented.The dominantmetaphoris a road thatbranchesintotwo alterna-
tive paths-one leading to the developmentof weapons of destruction,
theotherto the eradicationof humanmisery.Again, thereare optimists
and cautiousskepticswho warn thatthe technologicalproblemsin tap-
13
AmericanJournalof Sociology
14
Nuclear Power
14
FromAugust5, 1968,through theendof 1969,therewas onlyone 15-second
item
onnuclearpoweron thetelevision
eveningnewsprograms ofthethreemajornetworks
(see Media Institute1979).
15
AmericanJournalof Sociology
16
Nuclear Power
thecontinued
goodmoneyafterbad bysupporting ofnuclear
development
energy.
17
AmericanJournalof Sociology
18
Nuclear Power
19
AmericanJournalof Sociology
20
Nuclear Power
18 RichardStrout, indiscussing
othercountries'
distrust ofCarter'smotivesintrying
to
curtailbreederreactors,has themwondering whethertheUnitedStatesis "trying to
createa capitalistic
monopoly ofnuclearfuelforitself."Ourcodersincludedthisunder
thepublicaccountability categoryon corporategreed.
21
AmericanJournalof Sociology
protectivebarriers,
called"defense in depth."American nuclearreactors
cannotbe comparedwiththeirSovietcounterparts anymorethantheir
political
systemsarecomparable. Furthermore, eveninthismostseriousof
accidents,itturnsoutthatinitialclaimsofthousandskilledreflected
mere
hysteria,eggedon byantinuclear activists.
Events, as theFermiaccidentillustrates,do notspeak forthemselves.
By 1979,a progressinterpretation was forcedto competewithothersthat
were sayingthat a seriousnuclear accidentcould and probablywould
happen. No complicatedinterpretation is necessaryfora prophecyful-
filled.
We sampledthemediafortwoweeksafterbothTMI and Chernobyl. 19
Our TMI sample yielded 53 televisionsegments,6 newsmagazineac-
counts,71 cartoons,and 56 opinioncolumns.The accounts,as we noted
above, are less explicitin theirframingof nuclearpoweras such. Their
storieson TMI centeron two centralquestions:(1) What is it like to be
livingnextto TMI? Since thereare manyotherreactors,thereis a more
generalquestionimpliedhere:What is it like to be livingnear a nuclear
reactorthathas had an accident?(2) Is the situationat TMI undercon-
trol?Again, thereis a more generalstory,especiallyas the immediate
TMI crisissubsides:Is thistechnologyundercontrol?
Television.-The situationat TMI was a continuingstorythatdomi-
natedthecoverageof all threenetworksduringthesampleperiod.Visu-
ally, we were treatedto repeatedaerial shotsof thereactorsite,making
the special shape of a nuclearcoolingtowera familiarvisual symbolfor
thefirsttime.The use ofthisicon by cartoonistsbeganwithTMI, where
it frequently took on an ominoustone.
Nimmo and Combs (1985) suggestthat ABC in particularused the
coolingtowersas visual reinforcement fora runawaypackage thatper-
meated its coverage and providedits centralstoryline: "In the gothic
romance,thethreatto peace, tranquility, and happinessis embodiedin a
forbidding structureoverlookingthe community of simplefolk. . . . Dr.
Frankenstein'scastle in Transylvania,in a bucolic countrysideabove a
quaintvillage,is theclassicsetting."They arguethatABC's footageand
camera angles played on such imagery,"especiallyon days when ABC
correspondents did stand-upreportswiththeplant'smassivecoolingtow-
ers,envelopedin mist,loomingin thebackground.... Aerialshots,too,
captureda technologicalintruderin a ruralsetting"(pp. 69-70).
There is rare use of the mushroomcloud symbol.The Media Institute
study(1979) foundonlyfourinstancesofitsuse in themorethan 10-year
periodit covered-including theTMI periodin our sample. We foundit
19The Chernobylsamplesincludeonlytelevisionand newsmagazine
accounts.The
assemblyof cartoonsand opinioncolumnsinvolvesa muchmorecomplicated
data-
gathering
process-beyondourresourcesat thatstageoftheresearch.
22
Nuclear Power
23
AmericanJournalof Sociology
60
50
40
PERCENTAGE 3 0
20
* TMI PERIOD N= TJ
CHERNOBYL PERIOD N=74
24
Nuclear Power
So nuclearpowerturnsoutto be a bargainwiththedevil.Thereareclear
suchas inexhaustible
benefits electricity
andan energy
supplythatdoesnot
dependonthewhimsofOPEC. Butsoonerorlater,therewillbe a terrible
priceto pay. We aredamnedifwe do and damnedifwe don't.Andthe
deeperwe getin,theharderitis to getout.
25
AmericanJournalof Sociology
50
40
30
PERCENTAGE
20
playedmainlybyinvokingcomparisonwithearlierofficialdissemblingin
the United States at the timeof Three Mile Island. The devil's bargain
frameis never made explicit,but the sequence of a claimed benefitfor
nuclear power juxtaposed with runawayimageryoccurs in two of the
nine segmentswiththreeor morecodable utterances.
Newsmagazines.-The patternhereis quitesimilar.Figure2 showsthe
distribution of 103 utterancesdisplayingcentralideas in one or moreof
our six packages.Progressdoes somewhatbetterin quantity,but,as with
television,it is a beleagueredfaiththatis expressed.Time,forexample,
quotes Alvin Weinberg,introducing him as a nuclearadvocate and pro-
nuclearauthorwho believes that the alternativesto this sourceare "so
crummythatwe probablyshouldin a cautiousway continuethisnuclear
enterprise. butit has evolvedquitea bitfrom"too
"22 This is stillprogress,
cheap to meter."
Runaway is by far the most prominentpackage, but some cautionis
necessaryin interpreting this.More thantwo-thirds oftheutterancesthat
evoke it focuson theoverconfidence themethatthedevelopersofnuclear
powerhave overestimatedtheircontroland do notknow as muchabout
what theyare doing as theyhave led us to believe.
Public accountabilitydrops offin quantityfromits televisionpromi-
nence, but when it is displayed,the strongformof it is presentedmore
fully,accountingfor almost half the coded utterances(comparedwith
one-thirdof televisiondisplaysof thispackage). Newsweek,forexample,
quotesJane Fonda: "We can neverbe safe in the hands of utilityexecu-
tives whose financialinterestsrequirethemto hide the truthfromthe
public."
26
Nuclear Power
70
60
50
40-
PERCENTAGE
30
20
10
0
Progress Energy Devil's Runaway Public NotCost SoftPaths
Independence Bargain Accountability Effective
PACKAGE
27
AmericanJournalof Sociology
>~~~~~~~~~D
IR0_
10 WMl4Y
lABOOFTS
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I CF1g
R rleWAC
28
Nuclear Power
fapL '-
~~~~~~~~~~~~U
29
AmericanJournalof Sociology
40
20
PERCENTAGE
10
0 4
Progress Energy Devil's Bargain Runaway Public NotCost SoftPaths
Independence Accountability Effective
PACKAGE
30
Nuclear Power
31
AmericanJournalof Sociology
gerrespondentsare definitely
morepositivein theiracceptanceofatomic
energyand thispositivereactiondecreaseswithage." By the 1970s,this
resulthad been largelyreversed.In surveystaken between 1975 and
1980,generaloppositionto nuclearpoweraveraged40% in the 18-25 age
group,droppingto 37% forthe 26-35 groupand to about 30% forthose
over 36.29
5. One finalresultworthnotingis thatthosewho have reviewedmulti-
ple surveyshave notedthesensitivity of responsesto smalldifferences
in
question wording and the contextof the question in the interview
(Freudenbergand Baxter 1983; Nealey et al. 1983; Mitchell1980). It is
notclearwhetherthisvolatilityis reallyhigherthanon otherissues,butit
struckthese observersas significant when theyattemptedto distillthe
resultsof manydifferentsurveys.
Interpretation
How does our analysisofmedia discourseprovidea necessarycontextfor
understanding thesesurveyresults?Imaginea memberofthepublic,old
enoughto rememberHiroshimaand theage ofnucleardualism,trying to
make senseoftheissue ofnuclearpower.Let us assume,further, thatthe
issuehas onlymoderateto low salienceforourhypothetical citizenexcept
on thoseoccasionswhen it is givenhighpriority in the media.
Back in the 1950s, she would almost certainlyhave used a progress
schema30to understandnuclear power; no otherframewas available.
Untilthemid-1970s,she would have had littlereasonto thinkabout the
issueat all. We can reasonablyassumethat,whenshe encountered media
discourse,her anticipatoryschema remainedprogress.
At thispoint,herpersonalexposureto theissue culturethrougheither
the media or otherdiscourses,her enduringpredispositions, and her in-
terpersonalinteractions would all have playeda rolein the modification
ofherworkingschemaon nuclearpower.Many pathswerepossible,but
the natureof the media discoursesuggeststhat certainones were espe-
ciallylikely.
In the mid-1970s,the discourseoverwhelmingly acceptedthe inevita-
bilityand societalcommitment to nuclearpowerdevelopment,but there
was, at thesame time,a significant erosionofnucleardualismcombined
32
Nuclear Power
33
AmericanJournalof Sociology
34
Nuclear Power
CONCLUSION
We have argued here that public opinionabout nuclearpower can be
understoodonly by rootingit in an issue culturethat is reflectedand
shapedby generalaudiencemedia. The conventionalmethodofassessing
public opinionthroughresponsesto surveyquestionswithfixedcatego-
ries has two major drawbacksforour constructionist model, makingit
difficultto testour argumentdirectly.First,it obscuresambivalenceand
disguisesthepresenceof schematathatproduceno clear-cutpositionfor
or against. Second, it blurs the distinctionbetweenpeople withnonat-
32This questionwas asked onlyof the 91% who had "ever heardor read about
controversies
over nuclearpowerplants."Ambivalence,as we indicatedabove, is
morethansimplyknowingarguments on bothsides. Hence,suchfigures
shouldbe
regardedas crudeestimates
ofupperlimitson thenumberofthosewhoare ambiva-
lent.
35
AmericanJournalof Sociology
REFERENCES
Ball-Rokeach,SandraJ., and MelvinDeFleur. 1976."A Dependency ModelofMass
Media Effects."Communication Research3:3-21.
. 1982. TheoriesofMass Communication, 4thed. New York:Longman.
Bennett,W. Lance. 1975.ThePoliticalMindand thePoliticalEnvironment. Lexing-
ton,Mass.: Heath.
Boyer,Paul. 1985.By theBomb'sEarlyLight.New York:Pantheon.
Chilton,Paul. 1987. "Metaphor,Euphemism,and theMilitarization of Language."
Current Researchon Peace and Violence10:7-19.
Converse,PhilipE. 1964."The NatureofBeliefSystemsin Mass Publics."Pp. 206-
61 in Ideologyand Discontent,editedbyDavid E. Apter.New York:Free Press.
Fisher,BurtonR., CharlesA. Metzner,and BenjaminJ. Darsky. 1951. "Public
Responseto PeacetimeUses of AtomicEnergy."University of Michigan,Survey
ResearchCenter.
Freudenberg, WilliamR., and RodneyK. Baxter.1983. "PublicAttitudestoward
Local NuclearPowerPlants:A Reassessment." Paperpresented
at theannualmeet-
ingsof theAmericanSociologicalAssociation,Detroit.
36
Nuclear Power
37