Assessment Task 1 - SHE3001

Reading Response
Claudia Bartolo s4559540

Introduction 2
Article Summary 1 2
Description 2
Methodology 3
Key Findings 3
Article Summary 2: 5
Description 5
Methodology 5
Conclusion 7
References 9
Introduction

Health sociology is primarily concerned with examining the societal dimensions of health
and illness instead of concentrating on biological or psychological aspects (Germov 2019). This
field investigates the social determinants that shape health-related outcomes and strives to
elucidate the profound influence of social disparities (Baum & Fisher 2014), cultural
conventions, and structural elements on health and healthcare. The ultimate goal of health
sociology is to enhance the populace's overall health while advancing principles of social justice.

The theme for this week's exploration entailed examining how health-related messages conveyed
by the media often lack neutrality, factual accuracy, or advantageous implications for public
health. Consequently, the ensuing analysis summarises and delves into two articles exemplifying
topics that have been editorially biased within the media, shedding light on the subsequent
impact of these portrayals on the health outcomes of the information-consuming public.

Article Summary 1

Communicating population health: Print news media coverage of type 2 diabetes - Sarah
Gollust & Paula Lantz

Description

This article explores how the media communicates information about Type 2 Diabetes to
the US general public. This investigation questioned how the media portrayed diabetes in their
templates, the framing in which they influence their readers, potentially pushing the bias or
stigma that blames the individual for their condition. The aim was to identify the patterns and
trends that the newspapers follow to lead their viewers' opinions into believing that this
particular condition is treatable with behavioural and lifestyle modifications. Gollust and Lantz
sought to determine if print news media addressed health disparities as a social issue from a
'population health' perspective (2009).
Methodology

Gollust and Lantz analysed 19 of the country's top-circulating newspapers. They

examined every article published in 2005 and 2006 that defined the term 'diabetes' and exceeded
150 words in length. This process yielded 698 articles, excluding those not meeting the specified
criteria.

The analysis followed a structured approach to identify the noted causes of diabetes and identify
whether any treatment strategies were discussed in the articles. This information encompassed
identifying the type of diabetes being discussed, determining whether advocacy or
pharmaceutical groups were mentioned, and tracking the utilisation of research or scientific
studies.

The data collected was then organised and presented in tables using binary variables. These
tables visually represented the information gathered from the articles, which aided the
subsequent analysis and discussion.

Key Findings

Trends and patterns among the articles found that more than half of the 698 articles
(58.0%) mentioned at least one causal claim about diabetes, with obesity or weight gain being
the most frequently cited cause (69.6%). Additionally, only a small percentage of articles (less
than 12%) mentioned social or environmental determinants of diabetes, and most articles that
discussed causes did so across multiple categories, with social determinants always coupled with
another causal explanation.

The analysis revealed a consistent theme in the depiction of diabetes in the news media:
behavioural factors and obesity were the prevailing causal explanations, and this trend extended
to the management strategies discussed in the articles, where individual-level behavior
modifications, such as dietary adjustments, exercise, and weight loss, were the most frequently
emphasised approaches, while population-based strategies and policy interventions were
comparatively less common.
The analysis revealed disparities in news media coverage of diabetes, with a small proportion of
articles (13.6%) acknowledging social group disparities in diabetes rates, including higher rates
among Blacks (8.0%), Latinos (6.9%), Native Americans (4.4%), and Asians (2.6%), as well as
identifying the correlation between poverty and higher diabetes rates (3.0%), and regional
variations in diabetes rates (1.6%). Additionally, articles that identified disparities were more
likely to discuss social determinants and upstream policy strategies, and they were also more
likely to identify the causes of diabetes, including behavioural factors, obesity, and
genetics/family history, compared to articles that did not describe disparities.

The findings indicate significant variation among news outlets in their coverage of
population-health-oriented aspects of diabetes, with The New York Times and The Boston Globe
featuring a substantial portion of articles mentioning social determinants, upstream policy
approaches, and disparities. At the same time, other newspapers contributed minimally, and
longer articles were more likely to adopt a population health perspective. In contrast, articles
mentioning pharmaceutical companies were less likely to do so, with The Boston Globe being
more likely to embrace a population health orientation compared to The Washington Post and St.
Louis Post-Dispatch.

The conclusions of this research, which highlight the limited media coverage of policy strategies
addressing social and economic determinants of diabetes and the emphasis on individualised
causes and approaches, could have significant implications for health outcomes.

By largely neglecting the discussion of social determinants and social policy approaches, the
media may contribute to a lack of awareness and understanding among the general public about
the broader systemic issues that underlie diabetes and other related health conditions. This
limited coverage may hinder efforts to address the root causes of these diseases and implement
effective population health interventions.

Moreover, the scarcity of media attention to disparities among racial or ethnic minorities and
socioeconomically disadvantaged groups may perpetuate health inequities and reduce the
urgency of implementing interventions targeted at these vulnerable populations. Media coverage
can influence public understanding and support for such interventions, and the lack of this
support could impact the allocation of resources and policy decisions.
In summary, the media's role in shaping public awareness and attitudes regarding health
determinants can directly impact health outcomes. The limited coverage of social determinants
and social policy strategies in media reporting may hinder efforts to address the root causes of
diabetes and related conditions, exacerbate health disparities, and ultimately affect the
effectiveness of public health interventions.

Article Summary 2:

Fit to conceive? Representations of preconception health in the UK press - Kirsty Budds

Description

This article explores the implications of preconception health messages for women of
reproductive age, addressing critical questions about health. It identifies three dominant
representations: preconception health as optimising fertility, determining infant health, and as a
point of intervention. These representations, reflecting neoliberal health agendas, position
women as responsible for their fertility and future generations' health through self-policing their
lifestyles while raising concerns about the potential impact on women's autonomy, irrespective of
their pregnancy intentions. The text delves into various questions concerning health, primarily
focusing on the growing recognition of the preconception period's significance for pregnancy
and birth outcomes, and calls for public health advice and interventions to shift their focus
toward women before pregnancy rather than during it.

Methodology

This academic study curated a dataset of 57 newspaper articles from January 2013 to
December 2017 from prominent publications, including The Sun, Daily Mail, Daily Mirror, The
Daily Telegraph, The Times, and The Guardian. The research primarily centred on preconception
health, emphasising contemporary representations and discourses. The data analysis applied the
principles of critical discursive psychology (CDP) to analyse the newspaper articles. This
analytical approach encompassed inductive data-driven coding, followed by clustering codes into
themes and further refining these themes to illuminate culturally prevalent perspectives on
preconception health. Budds gave special attention to examining the implications of these
perspectives concerning social action and the construction of subjectivities within the context of
preconception health.

Key Findings

The newspaper articles analysed emphasised the association between preconception

health and fertility, offering various lifestyle factors for women to enhance their chances of
conception, reinforcing the perception that women wield significant control over their fertility.
However, a notable gender bias was evident, with most articles primarily concentrating on
women's fertility while affording limited attention to men's preconception health advice, thereby
perpetuating a gender disparity in fertility and reproductive health discussions.

These articles accentuated the potential health consequences for future offspring, both in the
short and long term, due to suboptimal preconception health practices. In the short term,
concerns revolved around potential fetal harm, congenital disabilities, and pregnancy
complications, primarily ascribed to women's lifestyle choices. Nevertheless, the discourse
surrounding alcohol consumption during the preconception period exhibited a degree of
resistance, with reservations regarding the risk communication that might induce undue anxiety
and negative consequences. In the longer term, concerns encompassed an elevated risk of cancer,
obesity, diabetes, and genetic abnormalities, thus positioning women as responsible for their
children's well-being from an early stage, even preceding conception. This accountability was
emphasised for women, while the articles rarely considered the impact of men’s preconception
health.

The findings underscored the significance of intervening in preconception health, advocating that
strategies to mitigate risk and enhance pregnancy and child outcomes should be instated during
the preconception period rather than solely during pregnancy. These interventions were chiefly
directed at women, encouraging the adoption of healthier lifestyles before conception,
particularly about aspects such as alcohol consumption, dietary choices, and obesity, thereby
portraying preconception health as an emerging facet of health citizenship. However, the
intended recipients of these interventions varied, with some advocating for women planning
pregnancy. In contrast, others extended their scope to encompass all women of reproductive age,
implying that women should not actively plan pregnancies until they have rectified health-related
issues. Nevertheless, select articles raised critical perspectives and resistance to these neoliberal
preconception health approaches, underscoring the implications of social inequality and the
potential surveillance challenges they might entail for women who are not yet pregnant.

This study provided insights into the prevailing messages about women's preconception health as
portrayed by the media. It highlighted the need for future research to explore how individuals
interpret and engage with these representations across various media sources, including social
media and online forums. Additionally, it underscored the importance of investigating how issues
of race and social class intersect with discussions on preconception health, surveillance, and
intervention, as these dimensions are often subtly intertwined in the discourse and merit further
exploration.

Conclusion

The article by Gollust and Lantz (2009) primarily concentrated on the topics of stigma
and disease mongering, examining how the media tends to attribute the development of health
conditions to individual responsibility rather than considering potential societal factors. Their
research shed light on the damaging feedback loop perpetuated by media biases, highlighting
how conditions like Type 2 diabetes carry a substantial stigma and are often portrayed as
individual issues rather than recognised as a burgeoning societal concern.

Budds' investigation on preconception health unveiled a media portrayal in which women are
depicted as the primary custodians of life, burdened with the exclusive responsibility of
preparing their bodies for the fundamental purpose of reproduction. In the event of
complications, they are often held accountable for alleged neglect in self-care. This concept of
individualism excludes the influence of societal factors and tends to lead to adverse health
outcomes, particularly detrimental mental health for women.

Both articles provided disparate insights into distinct issues. However, they yielded comparable
findings concerning the adverse impact of media on the health-related beliefs and outcomes of
individuals who depend on it for informed decision-making. Budds' article, being of a more
recent publication, incorporated a more significant number of excerpts from the analysed articles
to provide enhanced substantiation for the arguments presented. As a result, it facilitated a more
robust investigation, comprehensively addressing all pertinent data and findings.

Understanding health from a sociological perspective can be challenging when one has spent
one's whole life thinking, "How can I be healthier?" In reality, a healthier society is made up of
healthier individuals. When each person is seen as part of a bigger picture, it is easier to think of
health as something we all need to work on together. Gollust and Lantz effectively conducted a
comprehensive analysis encompassing numerous societal factors while examining the health
outcomes of individuals with Type 2 diabetes despite the stigmatisation perpetuated by the
media.

In summary, the articles by Gollust, Lantz and Budds, while addressing different health-related
issues, yield similar findings regarding the negative impact of media on individuals' health
beliefs and outcomes. Both articles stress the importance of adopting a sociological perspective
to recognise health as a collective societal responsibility, considering broader contextual factors
that influence individual well-being.
References

Baum, F & Fisher, M 2014, ‘Why behavioural health promotion endures despite its failure to
reduce health inequities’, Sociology of Health & Illness, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 213-225,
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.12112

Budds, K 2021, ‘Fit to conceive? Representations of preconception health in the UK press’,

Feminism & Psychology, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 463–482,
https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353520972253

Germov, J 2019, ‘Imagining health problems as social issues’, Second Opinion: An introduction
to health sociology, 6th edn, pp. 2-23, Oxford University Press.

Gollust, SE & Lantz, PM 2009, ‘Communicating population health: print news media coverage
of type 2 diabetes’, Social Science & Medicine, vol. 69, no. 7, pp. 1091–1098,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.07.009