Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Discourse & Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tulloch, J.
Right arrow Articles by Chapman, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Experts in Crisis: The Framing of Radio Debate about the Risk of AIDS to Heterosexuals

John Tulloch

MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY

Simon Chapman

UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY

Analysis of media representations of AIDS needs to examine the narrative construction of `otherness' and `expertise'. This paper is part of a project examining the narrative representation of the `new expertise' in Australia in a variety of popular media forms after the 1983 pessimism of the `Grim Reaper' television campaign. It examines the radio debate around Michael Fumento's The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS in terms of the empiricist and culturalist discourses of the main protagonists (Professor John Dwyer and Fumento), and their positioning and framing by radio interviews. The paper examines the way in which interviewers' procedures to display neutrality interact with intertextual authenticating devices to position each protagonist as `expert' when interviewed singly, though the consistent recycling of authenticating pre-texts in the Dwyer interviews gave him greater definitional scope. The paper concludes with an analysis of the semantic and rhetorical strategies employed by Fumento and Dwyer when on-line together, and an account of Dwyer's positioning of the audience in his construction of scientific consensus.

Key Words: AIDS • discourse • experts • framing • heterosexual AIDS • interviewing • myth • radio • rhetoric

Discourse & Society, Vol. 3, No. 4, 437-467 (1992)
DOI: 10.1177/0957926592003004002
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?