Abstract
This article reports on a content analysis of newspaper coverage of a wildfire on the Hanford nuclear site in the summer of 2000. The risk and mass communication literatures suggest that newspaper coverage of such fires would frame the event in dread terms, with some variation in the framing depending on the community diversity of the home market. We found that newspapers did vary in their framing of the fire, and that vigilance and confidence were more common framings of the fire. Our tentative explanation is that key risk communicators and reporters adhered to their professional ethics and relied on one another to develop a frame for Hanford hazards and risks.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
