Suchergebnisse

The 2001 anthrax attacks brought public health into the media spotlight in a way unmatched since the AIDS epidemic of the 1980s. This moment presented Americans with opportunities to better understand the strengths and weaknesses of the nations public health infrastructure, as well as to better understand the political and policy backgrounds against which this infrastructure operates. The authors systematically examined how thoroughly this underlying political context was covered by two major U.S. newspapers: the New York Times, widely considered the nations paper of record; and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the home newspaper of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). In particular, the authors explored whether and how these news sources drew connections between political decision making and functioning of the CDC. They conducted quantitative and qualitative analysis of 157 news articles, supplemented by interviews with four reporters and one editor close to the story. Political context was included inconsistently and in sometimes strikingly different ways by the two newspapers, and lines of accountability extending beyond the CDC itself were not clearly traced. The authors theorize that these patterns in coverage of political context reflect the nature of reporting on public health issues; the different relationships of the two papers to the CDC; and the unwillingness of key public health sources to articulate certain claims in the heat of the crisis.

A core principle of policy advocacy is that to engage decision makers in the urgency, complexity, and controversy of problems, advocates must effectively tell the story of those issues. Policy stories, or narratives, paint mental pictures of what a problem is, who is affected, and how it came to be. Yet, the persuasive effects of narratives on one key group, state legislators, remain understudied. Drawing from the Narrative Policy Framework (NPF), media advocacy, and public interest communications, we sought to inform advocacy strategy by illuminating state legislators' responses to messages about public investments in quality childcare for all. Contrary to expectations, we found that narratives can have unintended effects challenging or even diminishing legislator support. We discuss implications for advocacy strategy.

A core principle of policy advocacy is that to engage decision makers in the urgency, complexity, and controversy of problems, advocates must effectively tell the story of those issues. Policy stories, or narratives, paint mental pictures of what a problem is, who is affected, and how it came to be. Yet, the persuasive effects of narratives on one key group, state legislators, remain understudied. Drawing from the Narrative Policy Framework (NPF), media advocacy, and public interest communications, we sought to inform advocacy strategy by illuminating state legislators' responses to messages about public investments in quality childcare for all. Contrary to expectations, we found that narratives can have unintended effects challenging or even diminishing legislator support. We discuss implications for advocacy strategy.

Purpose:To test for racial/ethnic differences in perceived argument strength in favor of structural interventions to curb childhood obesity among lower-income parents of young children.Design:Cross-sectional, self-report.Setting:Online research panel, national sample of 1485 US adults in Fall 2019.Participants:Parents of children (age 0-5 years) with an annual income <$40,000, stratified by White, Black and/or Latinx race/ethnicity.Measures:SSB consumption, policy support, and strength of arguments in favor of marketing restrictions and a penny-per-ounce tax.Analysis:Descriptive statistics, multivariable OLS models.Results:Race/ethnicity was not a significant predictor of the perceived strength of a composite of marketing arguments (pBlack= 0.07; pLatinx= 0.10), however it was a significant predictor of the perceived strength of tax arguments (pBlack= 0.01; pLatinx= 0.01). Perceptions of strength of 12 of 35 discrete SSB tax arguments differed by race/ethnicity (p < .05). Arguments regarding industry targeting of Black children (marketing: pBlack< .001; pLatinx= .001; tax: pBlack< .001; pLatinx= .001), were particularly demonstrative of this difference. In contrast, arguments that these policies would provide support for parents (marketing: pBlack= 0.20; pLatinx= 0.84) and communities (tax: pBlack= 0.24; pLatinx= 0.58) were seen as strong arguments across groups.Conclusions:Black and Hispanic/Latinx parents may be more prepared to move toward SSB policy support than white parents. Emphasizing community benefits of policy may be effective in moving constituents toward policy support across groups.