A media-generated moral panic drives the vape debate
Posted on July 24, 2024 By Colin
AN ANALYSIS OF AUSTRALIAN NEWS STORIES has exposed the media’s role in creating a moral panic about youth vaping. The resulting outrage and distorted public opinion leads to knee-jerk, heavy-handed responses by regulators, without considering the unintended consequences or alternative options.
In reviewing media stories over a 6-month period, the researchers from the University of Queensland found that media reports were often sensationalised and inflammatory.
They presented vaping as an exaggerated threat to society, creating social anxiety and public concern, leading to a moral panic
The report found the media was biased and favoured the views of the same health experts and politicians who are critical of vapes and who supported restrictions. The views of pro-vaping experts were covered infrequently. When included, their biases were highlighted and their opinions discredited. As a result, the media coverage is narrow and neglects the full range of issues around vaping.
Australian media reporting on NVPs has included sometimes outlandish claims, such as that they contain ‘flesh-eating horse tranquilliser’ or toxic levels of radioactive polonium, and that vaping can lead to a ‘lifetime of gangster crime’.
It was no surprise that there was "significant divergence between the available evidence and public understanding' and that many people wrongly think vaping is as harmful as smoking.
How the media 'frames' stories
How the media presents or ‘frames’ a story is very influential. Framing involves selecting and highlighting certain aspects of a story to promote a particular interpretation.
The media tends to present or frame youth vaping in emotional and sensational ways to amplify the public perception of risk
Two of the most common ways of framing vaping are:
1. “Vaping is a poisonous epidemic”
In these stories, vaping is presented as an uncontrolled epidemic of young people using a highly toxic substance leading to a ‘public health disaster’ and a ‘youth vaping crisis’. This desperate situation demands an intensive and rapid response and pressures regulators to act urgently to 'crack down' or 'stamp out' vaping.
An example of this is “’I’ve lost my children to vaping’: the tragic stories behind the soaring rates of youth addiction” by Melissa Davey in the Guardian.
2. “A failure of control”
Some stories present vaping as a loss of control over retailers, marketers, and youth by the government, police, schoolteachers, and parents. This leads to attempts to control the situation, eg with vape detectors, locking school bathrooms, cracking down on retailers and criminalising vaping.
An example of this is “Nationals leader makes big admission on Australian vaping laws as he pushes alternative policy” at news.com.au. This story emphasises loss of control as the primary issue requiring a government ‘clampdown”, without giving any actual evidence. Possible unintended effects and alternative responses are not considered.
A more helpful approach is to frame youth vaping as a health condition requiring treatment and support, as for other harmful drugs. This could lead to better education, and harm reduction strategies. However, this approach is infrequently used.
“Think of the children”
Issues that threaten the health and safety of children resonate with parents and carers and are easy click-bait for headlines. They lead to panic and urgent demands for solutions. Often the solutions are heavy-handed, and ignore the needs of other stakeholders. Possible secondary or unintended consequences are overlooked.
This hysterical approach to vaping in the media does not recognize the complex and nuanced nature of vaping. 'Think of the children' creates a state of panic. Other concerns become secondary. The result is often poor policies that do not reflect the empirical evidence and have serious unintended consequences.
Conclusion
How the media reports a news story has a major influence on public perceptions which lead to policy change. Journalists have a moral and social responsibility to consider the impact of their work and the effects on society.
Although less 'newsworthy', reports on youth vaping need more balance to allow a more nuanced and broader debate. Stories should be less sensational and more factual.
Well, we can dream can’t we?