Portland State University

PDXScholar
Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses

1-1-2011

The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks: How a Best-Seller Diffused

Online
Melissa Ann Shavlik
Portland State University

Let us know how access to this document benefits you.

Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds

Recommended Citation
Shavlik, Melissa Ann, "The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks: How a Best-Seller Diffused Online" (2011). Dissertations and Theses.
Paper 153.

10.15760/etd.153

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of
PDXScholar. For more information, please contact [email protected].
The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks: How a Best-Seller Diffused Online

by

Melissa Ann Shavlik

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of

Master of Science
in
Communication Studies

Thesis Committee:
Cynthia-Lou Coleman, Chair
L. David Ritchie
William Becker

Portland State University

©2011
 ABSTRACT

This study describes how information spread on the internet by examining

diffusion, framing and source use surrounding coverage of the 2010 best-selling

book, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. The book presented a rare opportunity

to view how a story about science, discovery and race became a best-seller within

weeks after its publication. Through a mixed-methods and case study approach, the

author examines patterns of coverage using Google Alerts that traced the book’s

online coverage in the first six months of its release. The author found that online

information clustered around several themes with the most prominent describing

aspects of science and scientific discovery, followed by the book’s characterization

as a “best seller” or “good read.” Another recurring theme centered on issues

surrounding exploitation in human research. In addition, the study reveals that

sources who “set the frame” for coverage were most likely to be media figures,

including Oprah Winfrey, Alan Ball and HBO films, in addition to newspapers and

individual journalists and science writers. By examining the relationship of online

frames with sources, the author found that a diversity of frames is paired with key

sources: that is, multiple themes co-occur with source mentions, although the

themes may not have been generated by the sources themselves. Rather, sources are

linked to narrative frames by others who generate online coverage. The author

concludes that, while key sources initially set a message’s frame, once diffused, the

message may take on other qualities.

i
 DEDICATION

This undertaking is dedicated to my parents, Joseph and Regina Shavlik. In the

words of Tina Fey, “I made this out of macaroni for you.”

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to extend my gratitude to my thesis advisor, Dr. Cynthia-Lou

Coleman. Through her expert guidance I have grown as a writer, and her patience is

unparalleled. I would also like the other two members of my thesis committee, Dr. David

Ritchie and Dr. William Becker. I appreciate their time and feedback throughout this

process. I would like to acknowledge the individuals who assisted in the confirmatory

exercise of this study: Chris Cardiel, Maryjane Dunne, Jenny Fillion, Ryan Hofer,

Meghan Kearney, Ilona Malenkovich, William Jacob Amadeus Pinnock, Sean Rains,

Sara Szatmary, Robert Thatch and Jaqueline Vo.

A special thanks in order for the University Club of Portland for providing a

fellowship to help make this research possible. I would also like to thank the Office of the

Graduate Studies for their fellowship endorsement. I would also like to thank my

employer, the Northwest Power and Conservation Council, for granting me the flexibility

to complete my research.

Last, but certainly not least, I’d like to thank those who have provided support

during this journey, specifically: David Thelen, Katelyn Bessette, Marta Barberini, Stacy

Austin, and Andi Prewitt.

iii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract ................................................................................................................................ i

Acknowlegements ............................................................................................................... ii

Dedication .......................................................................................................................... iii

List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... vi

List of Figures ................................................................................................................... vii

Preface.............................................................................................................................. viii

Chapter 1: Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1

Chapter 2: Literature Review .............................................................................................. 2

Diffusion .................................................................................................................... 2

Framing ...................................................................................................................... 3

Framing and Diffusion Synthesis............................................................................... 6

Opinion Leaders as Sources ....................................................................................... 9

Internet Communication .......................................................................................... 12

The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks ...................................................................... 15

Chapter 3: Research Questions ......................................................................................... 20

Chapter 4: Methodology ................................................................................................... 24

Case Study Methods ................................................................................................ 25

Operationalizations .................................................................................................. 25

iv
 Procedure ................................................................................................................. 29

Chapter 5: Results and Analysis ....................................................................................... 48

The Google Alert Map ............................................................................................. 49

Emergent Frames ..................................................................................................... 50

Emergent Frames by Key Event .............................................................................. 53

Sources ..................................................................................................................... 61

Source Groups by key Event.................................................................................... 65

Comparing Sources to Frame Categories ................................................................ 69

Summary .................................................................................................................. 73

Chapter 6: Discussion ....................................................................................................... 75

Frames ...................................................................................................................... 75

Sources ..................................................................................................................... 78

The Intersection of Frames and Sources .................................................................. 79

Summary .................................................................................................................. 81

Limitations ............................................................................................................... 82

References ......................................................................................................................... 86

Appendix A: Comprehensive List of Sources .................................................................. 98

Appendix B: Coding Packet............................................................................................ 101

Appendix C: Author Biography...................................................................................... 141

v
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Frame Categories ................................................................................................ 43

Table 2: Categories by Frequency and Percentage of all Key Events .............................. 52

Table 3: Frame Categories by Key Event ......................................................................... 55

Table 4: Sources................................................................................................................ 62

vi
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Research Design Overview ............................................................................... 23

Figure 2: Map of Online Activity of for the keywords “Henrietta Lacks” ....................... 32

Figure 3: Categories by Key Event ................................................................................... 59

Figure 4: Source Frequency by Key Event ....................................................................... 66

Figure 5: Framing Categories by Source .......................................................................... 71

vii
 PREFACE

In many ways the internet has shaped me personally and professionally. My

earliest childhood memories include the green-on-black flicker of MS-DOS. At 16, I had

my first experience with image editing software. Since then, I have built websites,

produced web video and developed user interfaces. My involvement in digital media

engenders a technical understanding of online communication. However, my

participation in the process of media production makes me consider the broader

implications of my actions, as well as the collective actions of those who also work in the

digital field. In a recent manifesto written by anonymous contributors from around the

world, the Mozilla Foundation (the non-profit organization that developed the Firefox

browser) referred to the internet as “a global public resource” (Mozilla, 2011, n.p.). If this

declaration is true, then the internet is an intensely influential channel.

The ability to set the internet agenda harkens back to Donald Shaw and Maxwell

McCombs’ 1968 study of presidential election coverage, when they theorized that print

and broadcast media have the ability to set the public agenda by the sheer quantity and

placement of coverage. “In reflecting what candidates are saying during a campaign, the

mass media may well determine the important issues—that is, the media may set the

‘agenda’ of the campaign” (p. 176, 1972). In other words, the media influence what

issues are deemed important by publics. By focusing on some issues over others, the

media create an agenda of which issues are important and salient.

Scholars have studied agenda setting as a form of influence, arguing that the

ability to shape an agenda is a form of power. Power stems from deciding what publics

viii
find important. Bernard Cohen (1963) stated: “The press may not be successful much of

the time in telling people what to think, but it is stunningly successful in telling its

readers what to think about” (p. 13). In other words, the media may have the ability to

penetrate the cognitive processes of the audience member by tapping into assumptions,

stereotypes, and lived experiences. Walter Lippmann (1922) argued that the media

construct our reality; therefore to set an agenda is to define the world in which we live.

This reason alone, the ability to shape reality, confers a tremendous amount of power.

While defining “power” is an unwieldy task, I borrow from Michel Foucault’s

observation in “Power and Knowledge” (1980) that power is “spun through discourse”

and that, to understand power, we should focus on the “materials” and “tactics” of power

in discourse. Foucault saw media as powerful in their ability to shape an agenda that

influences what issues become salient for mass publics. On a fundamental level, the

power of discourse lies in the ability to influence the construction of meaning among

receivers of information.

Lippmann’s and Foucault’s observations intersect at the construction of meaning.

Foucault stated that, “power reaches into the very grain of individuals … inserts itself

into their actions and attitudes, their discourses, learning processes and everyday lives”

(1980, p. 39). Lippmann echoed this sentiment; he claimed that meaning is negotiated by

those in power, specifically members of the media. For example, an issue that gains

traction on the internet may be more likely to influence publics compared to an issue that

gains little attention. In this context, the ability to create or manufacture “salience” is

arguably a form of power, according to Foucault’s conceptualization of power. Using this

ix
logic, the ability to create salience on the internet – the ability to gain attention to a cause

by ensuring it becomes the focus of media attention – enables individuals and

organizations to leverage issues on the public agenda.

Methodologically speaking, Foucault suggested that social researchers

concentrate on the productive effects of power, as opposed to the repressive effects

(1977). Although interested in the productive qualities of power, my main objective

concerns the diffusion and framing of information rather than its effects. I am particularly

interested in the initial process of the diffusion of information. My interest in how and

whether media have the power to influence publics has led me to examine how one

particular event unfolded online, how the online coverage was constructed, and which

sources (people or institutions) were associated with the frames themselves.

x
 Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

The study undertaken examines how a narrative unfolded in the media following

the publication of the most popular science book of 2010: The Immortal Life of Henrietta

Lacks. Little empirical research has followed the unfolding of a narrative solely on the

internet and the current study takes two streams of communication literature – diffusion

and framing – to establish the theoretical platform. Using Everett Rogers’ diffusion of

innovation as the foundation, I asked how this particular book was diffused, or spread,

online. After describing the ways in which information flowed online, I examined

coverage to assess how information was framed. This descriptive approach may illustrate

which key message frames gained traction in online coverage.

Once I identified the prevailing message frames, I examined the frame content for

key sources identified as linked to the narrative, arguing that sources (like Rogers’

opinion leaders) may be linked to the very act of diffusing information. By describing

salient frames and key sources, we might better understand how the bestseller, The

Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, gained such widespread coverage on the internet.

I begin with an overview of diffusion theory, followed by an introduction of

framing theory and then a synthesis of these two theories. I will follow with a discussion

on sources, internet, and finally, I describe the book.

1
 Chapter 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

Diffusion

Diffusion theory, also referred to as the diffusion of innovations, describes how an

idea, product, or service spreads within a social network over time (Dearing, 2009;

Rogers, 1995). Many people view diffusion solely as a process of adoption, but here I

used diffusion to describe how the book, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, spread in

its initial stages. I specifically looked at how potential adopters are initially exposed to a

message. Therefore, the current research focused on the earliest stage of diffusion: the

innovation-decision process. Rogers (1995) described this stage as:

the process through which an individual (or decision-making unit) passes from the

first knowledge on an innovation to forming an attitude toward the innovation, to

a decision to adopt or reject, to implementation and use of the new idea, and to

confirmation of this decision. We conceptualize five main steps in the innovation-

decision process: (1) knowledge (2) persuasion (3) decision (4) implementation

and (5) confirmation. (p. 20)

Knowledge occurs when an individual is exposed to a message for the first time.

Persuasion occurs when someone forms a positive or negative attitude toward the

message. Decision occurs when an individual takes the steps toward responding to the

message’s call to action. Implementation occurs when the individual carries out the

actions suggested by the message. Confirmation occurs when the individual seeks

2
validation of her or his initial decision, and may re-adjust actions based on feedback

(Rogers, 1995).

The knowledge stage of the innovation-decision process stems from when,

“knowledge of an innovation, rather than the recognition of a problem or need by an

organization leading to search for a solution, launches the innovation process” (Rogers,

1995, p. 423). In other words, the first stage of diffusion pertains to the general awareness

of an innovation or message. The knowledge stage is tied to framing, particularly agenda-

setting, because it is at this early stage where a potential adopter knows little about the

message, and is reliant on the information producer to construct meaning (Dearing &

Rogers, 1996). The current research concerns the knowledge stage of the innovation-

decision process: the initial exposure to a message and the strategic attempts to inform

potential adopters in a network. The innovation-decision process is considered by Rogers

as the “public relations” stage of diffusion. This is the stage where audiences are exposed

to message frames prior to behavioral responses to the messages. The knowledge stage of

the innovation-decision process describes this first contact, where communication

strategy is most important. Framing is one way to set a message in motion in the earliest

stage of diffusion.

Framing

To impart an understanding of one of the fundamental tenants of news production,

I will describe the process of framing. First, a frame can be conceptualized as a device.

By device, researchers mean a conceptual spool to help make sense of seemingly

3
disparate bits of information. Nisbet and Mooney (2007) stated, “Frames organize central

ideas, defining a controversy to resonate with core values and assumptions. Frames pare

down complex issues by giving some aspects greater emphasis.” (p. 56). In addition to

being a device, frames are also structural elements. For example, Zillmann, Chen,

Knobloch, and Callison (2004) stated, “[Frames] are headlines and kickers, subheads,

photographs, photo captions, and leads, among others” (p. 60). Esser and D’Angelo

(2003) added, “[Frames] include the headline, the lead, and the body of the story as well

as patterns of quotations from sources” (p. 627). Martin (2003) stated, “Thus, when

journalists frame a story, they deploy a structure to the narrative that helps the audience

make sense of the events” (p. 193). Viewing a frame as a structural element implies that

the presentation of information also influences interpretation. By presentation, I mean the

factors external to the message such as format or placement.

Tuchman (1978) described frames somewhat differently, and focused on the as

frame as both a structural element and as a cognitive device. She defined a frame as a

cognitive device that turns unrecognizable events and conversations into discernable

events. Tuchman implied framing devices help individuals decide how the message

relates to their worldviews. In other words, Tuchman described how frames exist on a

deeper level beyond a simple organization of talking points. She described a process in

which frames serve as devices to give streams of experiences meaning. Like Lippmann,

Tuchman was a social constructivist, and stated that the framing process “can be seen as

the negotiation about the newsworthiness of an occurrence as a news event. And it

4
imparts a character to that occurrence” (p. 193). Here, frames help make sense of ongoing

interactions in a perceived reality.

Other researchers have focused on the ability of a frame to create salience. For

example, a successful frame would be one that draws attention to the strategically

constructed content. “The ability to spin a tale such that the strategist’s key messages

remain undiluted” is a way to affect an audience’s perception of an event (Coleman,

Hartley & Kennamer, 2006, p.547). In addition, Nisbet, Brossard and Kroepsch (2003)

stated that the science topics that get the most coverage in the media are often the most

dramatized. Adding drama to a news frame may draw more attention to the message.

Framing is also a strategy. If one understands the audience psychographics (e.g.,

attitudes, values, lifestyles, etc.) one can tailor the message accordingly. For example,

Molotch and Lester’s (1975) “mobilization of bias” links the importance of a message

with its relationship to the leanings or agendas of the audience. Their “mobilization of

bias” described why an oil spill in the United States in the 1970s was more of an issue for

Californians than it was for the rest of the country. The minimization of national

coverage was strategic in reducing public skepticism over whether there should be

drilling, because local audiences were less exposed to negative discourse regarding the

drilling. In other words, the selective reporting on the oil spill demonstrated how news

producers can exploit the sensibilities of an audience to encourage a specific

interpretation of an issue or event.

5
 Framing ultimately pertains to the way a story is structured and how an event is

presented and interpreted, and how a story is made salient. According to Robert Entman

(1993):

Framing essentially involves selection and salience. To frame is to select some

aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient in communicating text,

in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation,

moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation for the item described. (p. 52)

By salience Entman meant, “making a piece of information more noticeable, meaningful,

or memorable to audiences” (p. 53). Assessing salience in a message as part of a broader

news event “recognizes the ability of a media presentation to define a situation, to define

the issues, and to set the terms of a debate” (Tankard, 2001, p. 98). In summary, frames

make sense of experiences, therefore those news producers that can leverage salience

have the ability to define reality.

Framing and Diffusion Synthesis

Framing and diffusion describe two different communication theories that

dovetail to describe the negotiation of reality. Constructivists believe that this act of

negotiation exists on a societal level and occurs through transactions of information

(Lippmann, 1922; Tuchman, 1978). Recall that diffusion describes the spread of an idea

or message through a social network (Rogers, 2005). Framing selects aspects of

perceived reality with the intent of convincing audiences that the message is important

(Entman, 1993). Framing and diffusion intersect at the salience transfer. Here, salience

6
transfer describes the alignment of the audience’s interpretation of a message with the

objective of the information producer. This approach to salience transfer is a deeper

description of the process that occurs within McCombs and Shaw’s (1972) agenda-setting

model. By deeper description, I mean attending to the mechanics of the salience transfer

via the decision-innovation process of diffusion. In other words, exposure to a message

needs to come before any decision-making process. Consequently, a decision made in

response to a message affects the message’s movement through a social network. In the

following section I discuss research that examines this juncture of framing and diffusion.

At its completion stage, diffusion serves to bring about a behavioral response in a

social network. Classic framing research on social movements often alludes to a diffusion

process. For example, Snow, Rochford, Worden, and Benford (1986) examined the

persuasive powers of frame tactics in social movement organizations (SMOs). Among the

SMOs they examined are the Nichiren Shoshu Buddhist movement of Hare Krishna and

the peace movement of the 1980s in protest of the nuclear arms race. Here, the diffusion

occurs in the participatory aspects of SMOs – Snow et al., are referring to the fluid

interactions between an individual and a group or organization that result in the dynamic

transmission of ideas. Social movement research is implicitly diffusion research due to

the focus on understanding how information moves through social networks. Social

movement research also attends to the individual and organizational flow of information.

For example, the prototypical “grass-roots” approach often involves individual-level

communication as a way to diffuse information on a broader, organizational level.

7
 Though Snow et al., attended to the micro-macro salience transfer, recent research

has addressed diffusion directly. For example, Chabot (2004) explored the diffusion of

ideas between African-American intellectuals and Gandhian activists, specifically, the

ideology that laid the groundwork for nonviolent protest during the American civil rights

movement. Chabot studied how the pacifist frame entered the civil rights psyche by

tracing its emergence to specific events such as Martin Luther King’s four-week visit to

India in 1959.

A social movement can be an ideal outcome for many communication campaigns,

however not every communication strategist seeks large systemic changes; sometimes the

end-goal is to simply promote a product. Put simply, one can view diffusion as the

vehicle for a frame. For example, Kennedy and Fiss (2009) conducted a study on

hospitals regarding the diffusion of a care management policy. Kennedy and Fiss

explored how message framing affects different stages of adoption:

Specifically, we argue that early adoption is associated with opportunity framing

and motivations to achieve gains, both economic and social, while later adoption

is associated with threat framing and motivations to avoid losses, again in both

economic and social terms. (p. 899)

In other words, Kennedy and Fiss found frames that are effective with early adopters that

encourage competitiveness and efficiency; and frames effective with late adopters stem

from the “don’t get left behind” approach (shaming into conformity). Furthermore, “At

the beginning of a diffusion process, rhetorical arguments play an important role in

framing practices and establishing their legitimacy, but the prevalence and complexity of

8
such arguments decline over time as innovations are institutionalized” (Kennedy & Fiss

2009, as cited in Gamson & Meyer, 1996; Green, 2004; See also Green, Li, & Nohria,

2009; Suddaby & Greenwood, 2005). Therefore, framing plays a key role in the

innovation-decision process of diffusion, and declines in influence as a message or idea

becomes the norm.

To summarize, frames serve to legitimize an innovation or message before it is

widely accepted. Kennedy and Fiss crossed these theoretical streams to understand how

organizations “think” – by highlighting micro-macro interactions “affecting the thinking

of key decision makers” (p. 900). At this stage of diffusion, framing is meant to affect the

decision-making processes of influential individuals within a social network. These

important people have the power to incite institutional change because their decisions can

trigger a series of behavioral responses among other adopters. Rogers referred to these

influential individuals as opinion leaders. In the following section I will discuss the role

of opinion leaders in news production.

Opinion Leaders as Sources

A conceptual cross-over exists between opinion leaders in diffusion theory and

sources in news production. Rogers stated that opinion leaders have the ability to

accelerate or slow the diffusion of a message within a social network because they can

influence the behavior of other adopters. By focusing on opinion leaders within a social

network, a communication campaign can expedite a salience transfer. On the other hand,

a news source is an individual who provides information to a journalist. News sources

9
often have an elevated status and are solicited for information because they possess some

sort of authority on a particular news topic. Therefore, if the media have the ability to set

the public agenda, then sources become agents of diffusion because they transfer salience

(McCombs & Shaw, 1972; Rogers 1995).

Opinion leaders and sources are both considered “diggers and aggregators of

information” and “conduits of public opinion” (Wallsten, 2010). That is, sources have an

influential status in news production: they legitimize the news much like opinion leaders

legitimize adoption within a network. For example, Meraz (2011) described how sources

in political blogs are a part of a two-step flow process; news flowed from sources to the

followers of the blogs. She found two trends: “the growing power of social influence

among partisan blog networks and the weakening influence of elite, traditional media as a

singular power in influencing issue interpretation within networked political

environments” (p. 88). In other words, Meraz’s study showed how status boundaries were

blurred between informal opinion leaders in social networks and sources in

institutionalized media. I argue that these two roles possess a similar function that

transcends authority conferred by institutionalized media; as sources and opinion leaders

are both vectors of news, they carry and transmit information throughout social networks.

At times, the presence of a source has an effect on diffusion by influencing the

way the information is framed. For example, Coleman et al. (2006) found that:

Scholars concur that sources equipped with the resources to manage information

are those most successful in getting their voices heard and who thus “set the

10
 frame” in discourse. Source use is therefore a key feature in framing and is

intimately tied to issue definition. (p. 547)

Coleman et al. stated that the presence of a source has an effect on the frame, and the

presence of a source helps frame public discourse. Foucault (1980) argued that power

structures are evident at every level of society. If we look at power as the ability to set

salience, then opinion leaders are localized versions of news sources. In other words,

opinion leaders manifest in many ways, depending on the micro-macro nature of the

social network: internet message boards, talk show hosts, or well-known cancer

researchers. Therefore, any of these types of individuals or organizations have the ability

to set the public agenda; an area no longer the exclusive purview media-endorsed

sources.

Now, a source can be any person or organization quoted, linked to, or somehow

attributed within the news content. Applying this concept to the internet communication,

links and source mentions are two ways to identify potential opinion leaders. By links I

mean content attributions (for example: an internet opinion piece that has a link to the

original news article that elicited the response) or further information within the content

originating elsewhere. For example, Kleinberg (1999) stated that links confer authority,

and Davenport and Cronin (2000) stated that links suggest trust and the desire are

affiliated with the source. Examining how opinion leaders accelerate frames in the

innovation-decision process of diffusion reveals the dynamic, ongoing negotiation of

salience in internet communication.

11
Internet Communication

Internet communication is a hybrid model in a micro-macro sense of

communication because producers and consumers are the same group, facilitating both

interpersonal and mass communication (Levinson, 2009). Flanagin, Flanagin and

Flanagin (2009) described the internet as a technological artifact because of the

communal factor: “Technological artifacts thus result from a complex interaction

between technical capabilities and the interests and values of many individuals, groups,

and organizations” (p. 2). Most importantly, Flanagin et al. stated, “Among other things,

this shift toward greater individual interconnectivity, personalization, and innovation has

upset traditional one-to-many models of mass communication” (p. 8). Therefore, due to

its decentralized nature, some argue that the internet has enabled grassroots groups to

mobilize messages in a more effective manner than any other form of media (Earl, 2006).

This harkens back to the discussion on how diffusion and framing work together to

launch social movements. The internet provides a vast channel for accelerated diffusion

and a hyper-editorializing of messages (accelerated framing).

Three common conceptualizations that account for both micro and macrosocial –

interpersonal and mass communication – are social network analysis, Habermas’ public

sphere and diffusion. Two major approaches to social network analysis include

connectivist and structuralist (Postill, 2008). A connectivist approach is relationship-

based, and examines the relational distance between each individual in a social network.

A structuralist approach moves beyond individual relationships and looks at the

parameters or settings in which interactions occur. Since the internet is such a large

12
environment with an enormous amount of interaction occurring at any given time, Postill

(2008) suggested that the structuralist approach is better at explaining the manner in

which information travels online.

An example of the structuralist approach is field theory. Field theory is an

analytical framework that examines the power structures of news institutions, with a

focus on influence (Benson, 2006). Field theory weaves together the cultural and political

factors that influence the manner in which an idea is adopted in a social network. Field

theory also places a special emphasis on “taste makers,” a concept akin to Rogers’

opinion leaders.

Field theory aims to describe the setting of micro-macro communication. Another

approach to understanding this type of communication is the public sphere concept

(Habermas, 1962). A public sphere is a space where individuals and groups come

together to discuss matters that are important to them. It serves as a forum for salience

transfer on a micro level, where peers discuss ideas and grievances with one another.

Habermas recalled a time when the bourgeoisie of the 19th century congregated to engage

in discourse and civil action, what was referred to as “salon” meetings. Habermas

speculated that the mass media dissolved the public sphere because information became

widely available during the industrial revolution. Simply put, the industrial revolution

gave way to institutionalized media, the birth of the modern news business. He argued

that the all-encompassing presence of the media killed micro-level discourse about salient

issues in the public sphere. The analogy to Habermas’ public sphere helps researchers

understand the discourse that occurs on the internet, as opposed to a structural analysis or

13
field theory (Carey, 1995; Fraser, 1992; Papacharissi, 2009; Postill, 2008; Putnam, 1996;

and Schudson, 1997).

Some researchers argue that the internet is the rebirth of Habermas’ public sphere

because it dramatically altered the private and public spheres by creating a “third place”

(Jacobs, 1961; Schuler, 2004). To clarify, urban renewal activist Jane Jacobs (1961)

argued for the revival “the third place,” a social space apart from home and work.

However, those who argue for the rebirth of the public sphere hold that the internet

provides the “salon” (a hosted gathering for the purposes of entertainment or education

through conversation) equivalent to modern society (Postill, 2008). I argue that this “third

place” or “salon” is often housed in social media platforms. Social media, a type of

internet communication, loosely resembles a public sphere based on Habermas’ criteria,

because it is strongly interpersonal yet public at the same time (Levinson, 2009).

Conceptualizing the internet as a “place” implies social and cultural associations as

opposed to viewing the internet solely as a technical innovation. Online cultural factors

provide a linkage to the constructivist underpinnings of news production (Lippmann,

1922). In this sense, both the internet and the media are social products, windows into the

processes of how information spreads through a society (Freeman & Webster, 1994;

Stromer-Galley & Martey, 2009).

A major challenge for researchers is to understand the simultaneously

interpersonal and public type of communication that occurs online. For the past twenty

years, researchers have sought to describe the dual nature of this type of communication.

I argue that applying framing and diffusion to the digital platform will facilitate a better

14
understanding how information spreads. However in order to feasibly undertake an

inquiry such as this, it is best to look at these factors through a specific context.

For the current research, I hope to better understand the connection between

micro and macro level communication, by using case study methodology, as I explain in

the next chapter.

The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks

The focus of the current case study is The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks,

written by Rebecca Skloot. The book was released on February 2, 2010, and immediately

became an Amazon bestseller (Kellogg, 2010). Skloot first learned of HeLa cells in 1988

in a high school science class. Her teacher wrote the words “Henrietta Lacks” on the

board and explained to the class the origin of the first human cell line came from a black

woman. Skloot talked to her teacher after class, and he told her that no one really knew

anything about Henrietta Lacks. At that moment, Skloot’s journey began: to tell the story

about the woman behind the “HeLa cell.” The book took more than 10 years for Skloot to

write and was partially funded by student loans. Skloot spent a number of years trying to

contact the Lacks family. The family was reluctant and wary because of interactions with

a swindler promising reparations for their mother’s death and a scientist soliciting blood

samples under dubious circumstances. Skloot eventually became trusted by the family,

after much persuading.

Despite multiple edits and rejection from publishing houses, Skloot finally found

a home for Henrietta Lacks’ story at Crown Publishing. The biography came together as

15
a narrative with three distinct stories; the story of Henrietta Lacks; the story of her

children (their experiences with the author); and the story of the science, circumstances

and individuals behind the innovation of the HeLa cell.

The book begins with a description of Henrietta Lacks’ childhood in rural

Virginia on a tobacco farm in the 1920s. Henrietta grew up in a “home house” with

relatives and was raised in the same room as her future husband (and first cousin) Day, or

David. Henrietta had her first child with David at age fourteen. They later married. After

the birth of her fifth child, Henrietta felt a “knot” inside her. She received care in a

“colored” ward at Johns Hopkins, a hospital in Baltimore, Maryland. As was customary

at the time, doctors would take tissue samples without disclosing their intent or seeking

consent. A doctor removed some of Henrietta’s cervix for a cell culture. It was later

determined that Henrietta had an aggressive form of human papillomavirus (HPV), which

led to the cancer that killed her in a matter of months after her initial diagnosis. A key

factor in the controversy is that Henrietta Lacks did not know her cells we removed from

her body, and her family members did not learn of the multi-billion dollar industry that

resulted from the culture until twenty years after Lacks’ death.

Skloot takes the reader on a journey, describing the experiences of Henrietta’s

children and the scientific innovations that came from her cells. HeLa cells became

significant because the cells stayed alive outside of the body, unlike any other human cell

culture up to that point. The cells multiplied and HeLa cells became the “white mice” of

cancer studies. In addition, HeLa cells have had a significant role in the development of

16
the polio vaccine, HIV/AIDS research, as well as technologies such as in-vitro

fertilization and the Pap smear.

Controversy surrounds the autobiographical account of Henrietta Lacks,

especially evident in a chapter called “Night Doctors.” In this chapter, Skloot provides a

brief history of the distrust African Americans have for the white medical establishment

stemming from the time of slavery in the United States. Exploitive themes in the context

of biological assets such as cell lines have been examined by both scientists and critical

scholars alike (Appadurai, 1986; Lock, 2001; Thomas & Crouse Quinn, 2000).

Another theme in the The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks is the comparison to

the Tuskegee studies. For example, Skloot (2010a) wrote, “Black scientists and

technicians… used cells from a black woman to help save the lives of millions of

Americans... And they did so on the same campus – and at the very same time – that state

officials were conducting the infamous Tuskegee syphilis studies” (p. 97). To briefly

summarize the Tuskegee experiments, from 1932 to 1972 the U.S. Public Health Service

(PHS) conducted a study officially titled, “Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the

Negro Male” on 600 black men (399 with syphilis and a control group of 201) in Macon

County, Alabama (Thomas & Crouse Quinn, 2000). The men were never told they had

syphilis and were subjected to spinal taps and other procedures without treatment for the

disease. In the study, the “end point” was the subject’s autopsy. The family was given up

to fifty dollars in burial reparations.

The Tuskegee Study has far-reaching implications that affect health policy even at

present. The “Night Doctor” chapter in Skloot’s book relates the abuses alleged at

17
“colored” wards at hospitals such as Johns Hopkins and events such as the Tuskegee

study, which have seared distrust of the white medical establishment into the collective

memory of African-Americans1 (Lock, 2001; Skloot, 2010a; Thomas & Crouse Quinn,

2000).

In the context of the Tuskegee study, collective memory has had an effect on

contemporary public health because the racial folklore has been passed down to the

descendents, making issues such as the HIV/AIDS containment in African American

communities difficult. Some individuals are afraid to seek treatment because of

intergenerational distrust of the medical establishment due to a sordid history of abuse

and exploitation (Thomas & Crouse Quinn, 2000).

Access to health care is another prominent theme in The Immortal Life of

Henrietta Lacks. Henrietta sought medical attention at Johns Hopkins because the

institution provided services for the poor (Skloot, 2010a). The subjects in the Tuskegee

experiments consented to the study because in Alabama they were lured with the promise

of free health care (Thomas & Crouse Quinn, 2000). Skloot succinctly illustrates this

theme by reminding the reader that Lacks’ surviving children do not have access to

healthcare, despite the contributions their mother made to science.

Questions of policy and legal definitions also arise. One example discussed in the

book was when a doctor (David Golde) sold his patient’s (John Moore) spleen because he

had a rare form of cancer and labs were bidding for this unique specimen (Skloot, 2010a).

Moore sued Golde, but Moore lost the lawsuit and Golde was able to keep the profits

1
Collective memory refers to group memory often passed on orally and communally constructed
(Halbwachs, 1992).
18
from the sale. However, Golde’s medical license was suspended because he did not

disclose his intent to his patient. Lock (2001), a social historian, addressed the vast array

of ownership issues exhibited in The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks:

Who “owns” genetic material? Individuals? Communities or tribal groups?

Corporate organizations? Or humankind? Representatives of indigenous groups

for the most part exhibit a preference for group ownership (Shelton, 1998),

whereas US property law upholds individual ownership provided that body parts

are not separated from the body in question. Other people argue that DNA cannot

belong to anyone, or, alternatively, that it belongs to us all, and yet others claim

that ownership through the patenting of body tissues and cells is essential if

scientific research is to remain competitive (p. 86).

The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks has gained traction with lay publics as the

first extensive biographical account of the origin of the HeLa cell line. Other work has

been published on Henrietta Lacks, but not in this depth (see Curtis, 1997; Davidson,

1954; Jones, McKusick, Harper, & Wuu, 1971; Rogers, 1976; as cited in Skloot, 2010a).

In summary, the social discourse surrounding HeLa cells touches the public’s

most fragile of sensibilities, such as ownership of bodies, the treatment of minority

groups by scientific institutions, and the judgments made in defense of progress. The

most intriguing aspect of this case is how one single individual changed modern

medicine. The cells taken from her body impacted almost every human being who has

sought health care since the 1950s (Kellogg, 2010; Skloot, 2010a).

19
 Chapter 3

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

To better understand how The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks spread in the

initial stages of its publicity campaign, I present research questions that attend to the

process of influence in online social networks. In other words, the current research is

guided by questions that focus on frames, sources and the intersection of frames and

sources. Observing how information is shared, and who is involved, harkens back to

Foucault’s (1980) emphasis on the “materials” and “tactics” of power in discourse.

Specifically, I’d like to examine how and if sources and frames can influence the

way online audiences construct meaning (the salience transfer) and therefore, shape the

public agenda. For the purposes of clarity, I will present the research questions to provide

context for the case study. In the next chapter, Methodology, I will describe the ways

that I measured (operationalized) these concepts. The research questions are:

Research Question 1: How was The Immortal life of Henrietta Lacks diffused

online?

By “diffused” I mean how the amount of online coverage spread during the initial

communication stage (Rogers, 1995). By “online coverage” I borrow the definition from

Price, Tewsksbury and Powers (1997): “issues, events, and people deemed newsworthy

and thus deserving of media attention” (p. 482). By “media attention,” I mean stories,

notes and mentions that occur on the internet and are widely accessible.

20
 Research Question 2a: What emergent frames are associated with online

diffusion of The Immortal life of Henrietta Lacks?

By “frames” I borrow from the literature. I define frames by applying Tankard’s

definition as “salient aspects of content” (2001). By “salient” I mean content made “more

noticeable, meaningful, or memorable to audiences” (Entman, 1993, p. 53). By emergent

frames, I mean frames that are revealed in the online content, and are not established in

advance (Russell, 2009).

Research Question 2b: Do any discernable patterns describe the frequency of

frames that emerged in the online diffusion of The Immortal life of Henrietta

Lacks?

By “discernable patterns” I mean peaks, ebbs and flurries in the activity related to

clusters of “online coverage” (Tewksbury & Powers, 1997).

Research Question 3a: Which sources are associated with online diffusion of The

Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks?

By “sources,” I mean any individual mentioned or identified in the “online coverage”

Recall that I earlier discussed that a “source” is similar to an “opinion leader” in that they

21
are both transmitters of information (Coleman et al., 2006; Davenport & Cronin, 2000;

Kleinberg, 1999; McCombs & Shaw, 1972; Meraz, 2011; Rogers, 2005; Wallsten, 2010).

Research Question 3b: Do any discernable patterns describe the frequency of

sources that emerged in the online diffusion of The Immortal life of Henrietta

Lacks?

Once again, by “discernable patterns” I mean peaks, ebbs and flurries in the activity

related to the use of sources in online coverage (Tewsksbury & Powers, 1997).

Research Question 4: Do source patterns have any association with frame patterns

observed in the diffusion of the Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks?

By examining the relationships between source and frame, I can link together framing

and diffusion literature. That is, I can see what role opinion leaders within a social

network have on a salience transfer. To return to the literature, sources have the ability to

frame messages that create media agendas. Therefore, if the media have the ability to set

the public agenda, then sources become agents of diffusion because they transfer salience

(McCombs & Shaw, 1972; Rogers 2005).

22
Figure 1.

Research Design Overview

23
 Chapter 4

METHODOLOGY

The research questions are designed to explore how The Immortal Life of

Henrietta Lacks spread online. To address these questions, the current research used a

mixed-methods approach with several stages in a five-step methodology. The first three

steps are common in deductive methods. The next two steps follow a more inductive

approach, as noted below.

Briefly, the first three steps were conducted as follows: 1) Collect data of the

online coverage surrounding The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks; 2) Plot the data on an

x and y axis to visually describe the book release over time while isolating key points in

the data (such as noticeable peaks in activity); and 3) Develop criteria for framing and

source analysis.

The third step includes the following: a) Extract a statistically significant sample

from the population of online coverage; b) Perform a close reading of the online coverage

culled from the sampling procedure; and c) Identify the emergent frames within the

online coverage and place them in conceptually congruent categories.

Once equipped with the tools and categories developed above, I analyzed the data

using a mixed-methods approach which will be discussed in detail below. A brief

summary of the steps pertaining to the initial stages of analysis follows: 4) Perform a

close reading of the content in the key data points (identified in step 2 above) while

recording the dominant (mutually exclusive) frame category for all online coverage in

24
these zones of significant activity and finally, 5) observe and count any (manifest)

mentions of sources.

Case Study Methods

As already noted, the current study employed a five-step analytical process

recommended in case study methodology, which employs a mixed-methods approach.

The methodological framework articulated by Robert Yin (2009), states that uniqueness

is imperative in a single-case study. The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks is unique for

three reasons. There is only one Henrietta Lacks: the woman who died of cervical cancer

in 1951 whose cells resulted in the first “immortal” human cell line. The Immortal Life of

Henrietta Lacks is the only biographical account that features both historic accounts of

scientists and the Lacks family. Rebecca Skloot’s innovative use of social media

propelled the book to an Amazon bestseller immediately upon its release (Kellogg, 2010).

Another reason for the case study methodology relates to the communication channel: the

internet is a very large space to manipulate variables pertaining to the dissemination of a

popular book. Therefore, selecting an exemplar was necessary. In the following section I

will describe my research questions in greater detail and discuss how they fit in the

context of the methodological process.

Operationalizations

To begin, I examined the patterns of online coverage following the release of a

popular book. The patterns of coverage described how The Immortal Life of Henrietta

25
Lacks spread. Recall the first research question: How is The Immortal life of Henrietta

Lacks diffused online? For the current study, diffusion is applied to the early stages of an

innovation’s introduction to a social network: the knowledge stage of the innovation-

decision process (Rogers 1995). Recall, by “diffusion” I mean how the amount of online

coverage spread during the initial communication stage (Rogers, 1995). By “online

coverage” I borrow the definition from Price, Tewsksbury and Powers (1997): “issues,

events, and people deemed newsworthy and thus deserving of media attention” (p. 482).

By “media attention,” I mean stories, notes and mentions that occur on the internet and

are widely accessible.

In order to obtain online coverage I utilized a web service, Google Alerts, which

captured the principal unit of analysis in the study, a “content item.” A content item

refers to the information gathered by a Google Alert2 for the keywords “Henrietta Lacks.”

Other scholars have used this method of analysis. Ackland, Gibson, Lusoli, and Ward

(2010) used a tool similar to Google Alerts and compared commercial web sites, with

social web sites seeking keywords that referenced attitudes toward nanotechnology.

Ungar (2008) utilized Google alerts to follow how the media cover the bird flu pandemic,

gathering data from April 2004 to March 2006. Ungar argued that Google Alerts

generated a population of English-language content on the bird flu, and therefore

provided a “unique global perspective on an issue with worldwide reach and

ramifications” (p. 473). Such a method is similar to the approach taken by researchers

2
This study is using Google Alerts instead of Yahoo Alerts because my pilot test found that that Yahoo
alerts were too cumbersome; the alerts were not chronologically organized, but bundled and based on items
that had not been clicked.

26
who have examined diffusion of information, one key underpinning of the current

research. To summarize, “online coverage” is information recovered by Google Alerts.

“Online coverage” is a general term for “content items,” the principle unit of analysis in

the current case study. “Media attention” will be measured by points of increased online

coverage, and specific parameters are unspecified at this juncture due to the emergent

nature of the current study (Strauss & Corbin, 1990).

The next four research questions involve looking deeply at the data through

mixed-methods analysis. Recall Research Question 2a: What emergent frames are

associated with diffusion of The Immortal life of Henrietta Lacks? By “frames” I borrow

from Tankard’s definition as “salient aspects of content” (2001). By “salient” I mean

content made “more noticeable, meaningful, or memorable to audiences” (Entman, 1993,

p. 53). More specifically, by “emergent frames” I mean frames that arise when I

examined the coverage, borrowing from Russell’s study (2009).

In order to determine what frames emerged, I needed to read every page (content

item) and describe the content item. This process is detailed under the subheading Step

Three: Develop criteria for content analysis. Recall the research question 2b: Do any

discernable patterns describe the frequency of frames that emerged in the online diffusion

of The Immortal life of Henrietta Lacks? By “discernable patterns” I mean peaks, ebbs

and flurries in the activity related to the “content items.” Discernable patterns were not

predetermined before the current study, but data points with unusually high “media

coverage” were referred as “key events” – which are clusters of “content items” on a

given day. This process is detailed under the subheading Step Two: Plotting the data.

27
 In order to determine “frequency of frames” I first needed to determine frame

characteristics and thus answer Research Question 2a. Once I was able to describe the

emergent frames, I could create groupings (categories) followed by any particular pattern

in the diffusion of the online coverage. Details of the process are explained under the

subheading Step Three: Develop criteria for content analysis.

Recall Research Question 3a: Which sources are associated with online diffusion

of The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks? By “sources,” I mean any individual mentioned

or identified in the “content item.” Recall that I earlier discussed that a “source” is similar

to an “opinion leader” in that they are both transmitters of information. One way to

determine an opinion leader in the media context is to look at the sources involved in a

story. Recall that researchers frequently assert that sources affect the frame content, and

hence, public discourse. (See, for example, Coleman et al., 2006). By “sources,” I mean

any individual mentioned or identified in the “content item.” Research Question 3b: Do

any discernable patterns describe the frequency of sources that emerged in the online

diffusion of The Immortal life of Henrietta Lacks? As with the research questions

pertaining to frames, here, by “discernable patterns” I mean peaks, ebbs and flurries in

the activity related to the “content items.”

Research Question 4: Do source patterns have any association to frame patterns

observed in the diffusion of The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks?, seeks to link the

frame and source observations together to better understand what role opinion leaders

within a social network have on a salience transfer. This final research question utilizes

all of the operationalized definitions mentioned in prior research questions.

28
Procedure

Since the case study methodology is emergent in nature, I first needed to examine

the data in order to attend to the research questions. In the following section I will explain

this process, specifically focusing on how Google affected the research design. I also

describe the “close reading” process. I will conclude with a description of the

categorization of frames and sources.

À Priori Process

Step One: Data Collection. In the first week of February 2010, I signed up to

receive stories about a new book, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks at the Google

Alert website (www.google.com/alerts). I specified that I would like to receive content

for the words “Henrietta Lacks.” To clarify, “Henrietta Lacks” serve as keywords. A

keyword specification helps search engines sift for content based on the presence of those

particular words.

I chose to receive news, blogs, and web (the “everything” option). Under the

“how often” option I specified “as-it-happens” as opposed to “once a day” and “once a

week.” For the volume option, I chose “all results.” I then submitted my email address

and clicked the “create alert” button.

My first alerts began to trickle in shortly after, and I continued to receive alerts on

a daily basis, sometimes several times a day. I then tallied the population of Google

Alerts for the phrase “Henrietta Lacks” over the course of 180 days, from February 7 to

August 5, 2010. The time frame thus begins five days after the release of the book and

29
ends six months after. This time frame was chosen to generate enough data to evaluate

the initial stages of diffusion. In the current study, the time frame yielded 3,838 content

items from the Google Alerts. My next step was to see how the nearly four thousand

content items diffused online.

Step Two: Plotting the data. To visualize the diffusion process, I created a graph

of all 3,838 items over time. Other researchers used similar approaches to discern

meaningful information (Arsenault, Smith, & Beauchamp, 2006; Grady, 2006; Lynch

2006). Arsenault et al. used Latour’s graphism theory, which holds that visual

representations of information, such as graphics, are central to scientific comprehension.

For example, Arsenault et al. (2006) stated, “those who study the role of visual

representations in science note that images can convey highly complex information that is

not readily conveyed in linguistic symbols” (p. 39). Social researchers use graphs and

other types of data visualization because the forms are immutable, they convert

ephemeral observations into tangible presentations, and they feed the need for pattern

recognition to create meaningful interpretations. Lynch (2006) placed value in scientific

images because they depict that which is too large, too small, too fast or too slow to

directly observe. In the current research, the activity map helped display a concept too

large (3,838 web pages over the course of 180 days) to conceptualize without a visual

aid. I will later discuss how data visualization plays a key role in reporting results.

Therefore, the data visualization elucidated discernable patterns of media

coverage making clusters of “content items” – “key events” – apparent. The rationale

behind graphing activity is to provide a picture of diffusion and address my research

30
questions. Each Google Alert retrieved anywhere from one to twelve content items. A

more detailed discussion on content items within alerts can be found under the Step

Three: Develop criteria for content analysis. (See Figure 2.)

31
Figure 2.

Map of Online Activity of for the keywords “Henrietta Lacks” in 2010

Activity was determined by the key words “Henrietta Lacks.” The dependent variable on the vertical axis is
the number of Google alerts received, the independent variable on the horizontal axis is the day in the data
set. Total number of alerts is 3,383.

When I charted the items (see Figure 2), four spikes appeared as the highest data

points: March 29 (39 alerts); April 22 (40 alerts); May 12 (50 alerts); and June 21 (41

alerts). Another noticeable feature of the data was the first spike, which occurred

February 16 (29 alerts) signaling a jump of activity after February 14, (3 alerts). Although

February 16 was not a day of high indexing, it was included in the analysis because it was

the first spike in the activity. For the purposes of symmetry, I also selected the last spike

32
in coverage in the 180-day period. I chose July 21 (32 alerts) as an end point. This day

represents the last peak of activity across the 180-day period. Therefore, I refer to these

six spikes of coverage as key events. By isolating key data points, I could examine the

high points of online activity. Recall that data points with unusually high media coverage

are referred to as “key events.” I counted all of the content items captured within each

alert that fell on a key event date, resulting in a total of 231 content items.

Step Three: Develop criteria for content analysis. Recall that a key variable in

the study is the frame, which I defined as attributes of content that are salient (i.e.,

noticeable, meaningful, or memorable.) In order to investigate how The Immortal Life of

Henrietta Lacks was framed online, my intent was to determine frame categories for

evaluation, much like Russell (2009) and Ungar (2008). A sampling procedure was then

employed to lay the foundation for a coding process. In order to create categories, I

needed to understand the characteristics of the content in order to determine “frames.” I

therefore selected a sample of frames to use for determining categories. My process

followed these steps: I used a statistical significance calculator that indicated that 349

content items (web pages), extracted randomly, would give me a 95% confidence level

and a margin of error of 5 (recall that I had 3,838 content items). I then used a random

number generator to select the sample. In Microsoft Excel, the alerts were numbered

from 1-180 to represent the days in the data. I used this numbering system as a point of

reference for the range generated by the randomizer. Since anywhere from one to twelve

content items could be found within one Google alert, I repeated the process until I

33
reached 349 content items. Once I obtained the sample, I read the 349 content items to

identify emergent frames in online coverage of The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks.

Categories. Following Russell (2009), I determined frames by a close reading of

the content items. In other words; discerning frame content is a form of textual analysis.

Culler (1997) noted that a close reading is to treat a work as something of interest in

itself, rather than a “symptom” of something else by interpreting a cultural object as

complex structure. Culler addressed interpretation as a process: “For any element of

work, you can ask what it does, how it relates to other elements, but interpretation may

ultimately involve playing the ‘about’ game: ‘so what is this really about?’” (p. 64).

Other researchers have used close readings to measure frames, for example, Coleman and

Dysart (2005) followed Culler’s lead, and “examined news coverage using a ‘close

reading’ of all news articles that met the search parameters in the study. Our intent was to

gain insight into the tenor of the news coverage, noting particular frames that emerged

and assessing how scientific rationality and cultural rationality took shape” (p. 236).

Coleman and Dysart measured emergent frames by key words and recurring themes.

Russell (2009) conducted a study on fictional representation of science in British novels

from the 1930s and the 1960s. He used the close reading method to determine “doing

science” frames and the “ethical implications of science” frames.

My sample of 349 content items yielded a diverse array of frames. Among those

that emerged were: Frankenstein comparisons; exploitation; racism; family; writer’s

resources (how to write non-fiction); detective mysteries; “HeLa as a heroine”;

reproductive health; Black history month; genetic ownership; conspiracy theories and

34
more. I created an overall list of frames based on the close reading. However, in order to

see patterns of frames across time, I needed to organize these emergent frames into

categories.

To determine categories, I observed similarities in which the substantive topics

were discussed. Categories were created to serve as groupings for conceptually congruent

frames. I then grouped all frames into eight categories as follows: 1) the exploitation

category which mainly pertained to the Lacks’ family misfortune and racial discussions;

2) the science category which pertained to medical and technical discussions regarding

the HeLa cells, especially cancer and HPV research; 3) the ethics category which

pertained to the macro or policy issues surrounding topics in the book, such as genetic

ownership; 4) the anthropomorphism category was designated for contemplative or

imaginative discussions regarding the book (later renamed projection); 5) the lists

category consisted of items structured as listings, either retail or top-seller lists, etc; 6) the

book publicity category which pertained to the release of The Immortal Life of Henrietta

Lacks, 7) the Skloot category which pertained to content focusing on the author; and 8)

the social reading which pertained to information about the people reading the book.

I arrived at the categories by placing common frames into collapsed categories

representative of overarching concepts. To further explain, I will provide an example

from each category. I came upon a story written by Cynthia Littleton for Variety (2010).

The article was titled, “Ball, Winfrey partner on ‘Life’: Pair will produce HBO pic via

Harpo.” The article announced the partnership of Oprah Winfrey, Alan Ball and HBO

Films to create a Henrietta Lacks movie. Two photos are to the right of the content, one

35
of Oprah Winfrey and one of Alan Ball. The content reads: “Book blends the story of the

groundbreaking science enabled by Lack’s (sic) unusual resilient cells with the

devastation that her death and the medical research process had on her family” (n.p.).

Overt emphasis on the hardships of the Lacks family, and how they suffered at the hands

of science, appeared to me as belonging to an exploitation category.

Another frame category can be found in a feature article written for the Guardian

newspaper (UK). Science writer, Liz Hunt, wrote a piece titled: “The Immortal Life of

Henrietta Lacks: a bittersweet legacy.” The content starts with a large photo of an amber-

tinged, microscopic image of cells. The caption reads: “Researchers experiment on

human cells. The HeLa strain of cells revolutionised medical science, but Henrietta

Lacks’ own story was a sad one.” Hunt begins recalling her experience with HeLa

innovations: describing her days as a pharmacist and when she saw Adam Curtis’s The

Way of the Flesh (a BBC documentary). Hunt then writes a technical description of

immortal cell lines. Therefore, I placed this item in the science category.

An example of a content unit that indicated an ethics frame came from a blog

called Scope, published by the Stanford School of Medicine (2010). The content began

with an update, Skoot’s response to the post via Twitter:

Update 04/23/10: Last night Rebecca Skloot sent a tweet to @sumedicine about

our post: Henrietta’s case is different in many ways, but the research done on her

children’s samples w/out consent? Not so different.

The tweet responded to a summary of the legal settlement between Arizona State

University and the Havasupai Indian tribe. Arizona State University paid the tribe

36
$700,000 in damages stemming from a diabetes study in the 1990s. The university

collected blood samples from over 200 tribal members and, “conducted additional

research that the tribe contended violated informed consent” (Costello, 2010, n.p.). The

blogger (Paul Costello) then wondered whether the children of Henrietta Lacks would

benefit from such restitution. Costello sought the opinion of a lawyer, Hank Greely (law

professor and director of the Center for Law and Biosciences) who discussed the

differences between the Henrietta Lacks situation and the how the Havasupai blood

samples were handled. Costello adds:

Greely does think the Havasupai case is a “big deal.” At least, he hopes it will be,

“because I think science has been taking a too cavalier view of how broadly it can

use samples and data it gets from people for one purpose.” (n.p.)

The piece closes with Costello presuming a moral victory for Henrietta Lacks based on

the outcome of the Arizona State versus the Havasupi Indian Tribe. The content

emphasized professional practice, informed consent, Health Insurance Portability and

Accountability Act (HIPPA) and health care reform. Overall, genetic ownership is the

salient theme in the blog post; therefore I placed the item into an “ethics” category.

There were several instances in the à priori sample where content items consisted

of individuals projecting their personal values on the HeLa cell discourse. This type of

content also took on mythical comparisons such as “Frankenstein” and other times

implied a sense of agency to the cells. I called this category anthropomorphism –

suggesting that users where applying human-like qualities to the HeLa cells. [Note: in a

confirmatory exercise (which I will detail later in this section) the participants suggested

37
that this category be renamed to reflect a different area. Upon further discussion, this

category was renamed projection].

To further clarify, two examples of the projection (anthropomorphism) category

follow. An individual named Chase Kyla Hunter wrote a post regarding Henrietta Lacks

on disclose.tv (2010). Disclose.tv purports to “revealing the truth” by providing a forum

for alternative news, unexplained phenomena and paranormal activity (2011). In a post

titled: “God’s Final Judgment of Mankind,” Hunter uses analogies such as Frankenstein

to describe medical innovations. She described how scientists have created microscopic

cyborgs made of human cells, and they survived when they were injected into HeLa cells

during an experiment. She also refers to Henrietta Lacks as a “poor, cancer-stricken

woman.” The religious undertones and mythical analogies to “Frankenstein science”

qualified this content for the anthropomorphism category (later renamed projection).

A second example occurred on a website for “Ramtha’s School of

Enlightenment” (2010). An individual name Jaime Leal-Anaya posted a discussion on

Henrietta Lacks, which resulted in an optimistic discussion on cancer:

But what is a cancer cell? It is an outbreak, a revolution. It accesses its own

genius. It becomes immortal and convinces all the other cells around it to become

immortal. They then start to march and play war on every other cell. The cancer

cells send legions to every part of their world and start converting other cells.

That is no different than Christianity, Buddhism, or any other ism. (n.p.)

An example of a content item that fell within the lists category occurred when

blogger Lisa Guidarini (2010) posted an Amazon.com review of The Immortal Life of

38
Henrietta Lacks on her blog titled Bluestalking: Editor at Large of Her Own Life. The

post is a direct link to the Amazon book review, under the post title: “Recently borrowed

from my library” Guidarini described herself as a book reviewer and Reference and Adult

Program Librarian. After the Amazon post she writes: “Note: I haven't read it yet, but it’s

in my hot little hands. It sounds great!” (n.p.). A second example of a content item that

qualified for the lists category was on a blog called, “Harris Online” (with eight

contributors identified by first name only). The post was titled: “Best Sellers by Area”

(2010). The text below the title states: “What does it say about various locations when

you compare bestsellers?” Three regions are represented, the Washington, D.C. area and

the San Francisco Bay area, with a national comparison. Each list features the top ten

non-fiction best sellers in the respective area. Under the D.C. non-fiction list, The

Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks is ranked ninth, under the Bay Area list the book is

ranked fifth, and under the national non-fiction list, the book is ranked eighth. The

blogger concludes: “I always look at the national bestseller list and scratch my head, even

more than the Bay Area one. Maybe as a generalization, more politics in Washington,

more lifestyle in San Francisco, more conservative reading interests overall in nationally”

(n.p). The nature of the content listing lands this post in the lists category.

An example of a content item that qualified for the book publicity category was a

post on one of Skloot’s blogs named “Culture Dish” on scienceblogs.com. She posted a

trailer (a video) for the first leg of her book tour. The video caption reads:

People often ask whether the Lacks family has joined me for any of my book tour

events and how they feel about the book. Here, in the first of what will be several

39
 trailers of The Immortal Book Tour, you can see bits of the tour, including the

blizzard that nearly prevented me from getting there, many great photos, footage

of several Lacks family members talking about the Immortal Life of Henrietta

Lacks, and more. (Skloot, 2010b, n.p.)

This content item qualified for the book publicity category because Skloot is promoting

her book on her own blog, highlighting her book tour.

Another category that I decided described the frames concerned the author,

personally. An example is a feature written by Marc Covert in The Oregonian’s online

platform OregonLive (2010). The article is titled “Rebecca Skloot's first book presents

the immortal life of Henrietta Lacks and the debt we owe her.” The article begins with a

brief overview of the book, but transitions to biographical information about Rebecca

Skloot:

A self-described “science nerd” who grew up in Portland, the daughter of writer

Floyd Skloot, Rebecca Skloot first heard about Henrietta Lacks and the HeLa cell

line at Portland Community College in 1988. When she asked her instructor

where Lacks was from, whether she had any children or if she ever knew what her

cells had done for so many people, he couldn't tell her a thing – “no one knows

anything about her,” he said with a shrug. (Covert, 2010, n.p.)

An example of a content item that qualified for the social reading category was a

blog for an advanced placement biology class. The teacher listed upcoming quizzes and

book chapters as well as a reference to an upcoming field trip:

40
 Tuesday (3/30/10): Finish Excretory System. Plus field trip to UAB to hear author

Rebecca Skloot discuss her new book, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks.

(Reardon, 2010, n.p.)

This content item qualified for the social reading category because of the emphasis on the

people reading (or interacting) with the book as opposed to the book itself, and the social

aspects surrounding the book. The aforementioned examples are intended to describe the

type of discourse encompassing The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks.

In summary, I determined the eight prominent frame categories: 1) exploitation,

2) science, 3) ethics, 4) projection (renamed from antrhopomorphism), 5) lists, 6) book

publicity, 7) Skloot, and 8) social reading. Later, two other categories were added:

unknown and other. Unknown and other are not frames. Unknown is a designation for

indeterminant frames, and other is a designation for any content that did not fit into the

other categories. Exploitation, science, ethics, anthropomorphism (later renamed

projection), and Rebecca Skloot are frame categories that attend to Culler’s (1997) close

reading approach, “What is this about?” Book publicity and social reading appeal to the

strategic function of framing (Molotch & Lester, 1975). Lists qualifies as a frame that

functions as a structural component (Zillmann et al. 2004; Esser & D’Angelo, 2003).

Confirmatory exercise. In order to test whether the categories were an appropriate

way to sort the frames, I performed a confirmatory exercise. I approached 10 graduate

students (a convenience sample) on March 31, 2011. I provided the judges with a sample

of twenty web pages (content items), with two examples from each of the 10 categories I

had already created. I told the judges how I selected the web pages and asked them to

41
help determine if the category types made sense. I asked the group to discuss each

example and tell me what type of category they would select for each web page. I wrote

the 10 categories on the blackboard. I then asked each judge which category best

described the web content. The group categorized each web page the same way I had

categorized them. However, there was one adjustment. Recall that the category named

anthropomorphism was renamed projection to expand the concept to include religious or

contemplative discussions based on feedback from the student judges. Table 1 illustrates

the final categories.

42
Table 1.

Frame Categories

Category Frame Description

Exploitation In the exploitation category, racial frames are assumed (i.e., “poor black
mother”) and focused on the marginalized or vulnerable in reference to web
page content. For example: emphasis on “her children never knew,” any
mention of Tuskegee, or overt emphasis on the Lacks family, poverty, race,
or gender.

Science The science category is typically a laundry list of breakthrough research that
utilized HeLa cells. For example, research includes: in-vitro technology, the
Polio vaccine, treatment for sexually transmitted infections, and cancer
advances with a noticeable absence or minimization of biographical
information regarding Henrietta Lacks when it is the dominant frame.

Ethics The ethics category is meant for frames that specifically address medical
ethics particularly in reference to professional practice, informed consent,
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA), genetic
ownership or health care reform. This frame does not focus solely on the
exploitation of vulnerable individuals, but is a more prescriptive approach
for a professional code of conduct or a call for a change in policy.

Projection The projection category is for the contemplative, philosophical or abstract

(Renamed from frames. It can include expressions of gratitude or religiosity or can imply
Anthropomorphism) that the cells have some sense of agency. It often takes the form of
discussing Henrietta Lacks’ cancer cells as if they were her (as a person).
Examples include: Frankenstein analogies and phrases such as “she’s a
mother to all of us,” “she’s an angel,” “they shot her into space,” and “they
injected her with AIDS.”

Lists The lists category is for cases where the title The Immortal Life of Henrietta
Lacks is listed with no other content related to the book. This category is not
limited to best seller lists, bit torrents, retail lists and library lists and
includes blog postings such as widgets that display “what I’m reading.”
Lists is a significant category because it captures the conversational aspect
of the book’s diffusion, by providing the structure for a content item.

Book Publicity The book publicity category has two frame approaches: public relations
activity from the author that offers no more than the standard summary of
the book, if present. Examples include author speaking engagements
pertaining to The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, excerpts from the book
without any editorializing and second, obvious plugs from the individuals
other than author with the “go out and buy this book” approach.

43
Rebecca Skloot The Rebecca Skloot category is restricted to biographical or professional
frames about the author. For example: “Rebecca Skloot is a science writer
and author of The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks.”

Social Reading The social reading category is for book clubs, or reading initiatives with an
emphasis on communal discussion frames, message board queries,
Craigslist’s discussions, etc. Other examples include Black History Month,
solidarity, and homework questions. This category pertains to discussions not
so much about the book, but about the people reading the book.

Unknown Unknown (or indeterminant) designation includes spam, 404s, server errors,
expired content, blocked content, and pages not in English. These links are
still an important part of the data because, for example, spammers or affiliate
marketers may put links in unrelated sites out of a response to users searching
the phrase, “Henrietta Lacks.” Therefore, these pages are still reflective of
discourse and general public interest.

Other The other designation is for content that does not qualify for any of the
categories stated above.

Posteriori Process

Equipped with category criteria, the next two steps in the procedure entailed

retuning to the key events defined in Step Two: Plotting the data. The purpose of using

the key events as a point of reference is to identify potential activity that spurred frames

and sources. Focusing on these data points:(February 16, March 29, April 22, May 12,

June 21 and July 21) I observed two things: 1) the emergent frame categories of content

within these heightened spikes of activity, and 2) the sources associated with these

content items. Notice that source data were not included in the confirmatory exercise,

because sources are manifest. Unlike the latent frame data, sources did not require

interpretation and were not included in the inter-coder test. In the following, I will

discuss how I attended to emergent frames, tested inter-coder reliability, and finally, how

I determined sources.

44
 Step Four: Close reading for frames. To address what emergent frames occurred,

I created frame categories as detailed in the previous section. I then performed a second

close reading procedure of the content items that appeared in the key event data. Frames

emerged in the following categories: exploitation, science, ethics, projection, lists, book

publicity, Rebecca Skloot, social reading, unknown and other (see Table 1). In the next

chapter, Results and Analysis, I will discuss which emergent frames occurred on key

event days.

Inter-coder Reliability. To check for consistency regarding how I categorized the

content items within the frame categories, I conducted a procedure using inter-coder

reliability. I randomly selected 23 pages from the pool (10 percent of the 233 web pages)

for the test (Kaid & Wadsworth, 1989; Lacy & Riffe, 1996; Neuendorf, 2002; Wimmer &

Dominick, 1991). I gave two volunteer coders identical packets consisting of examples

of web pages (screen shots) as well as the original alert information (screenshots of

original URLs and content summaries) provided by Google. A coding sheet that

corresponded to the web page examples was also included. On the coding sheet the

coders were asked to check one of ten boxes (each representing a category) and match

each page with a frame category. In this reliability check, a matrix was constructed to sort

coder responses to frame categories only, since there were only 10 possible options (See

Table 1) (Brennan & Prediger, 1981; Randolph, 2005; Randolph, 2008; Siegel &

Castellan, 1988; and Warrens, 2010). The coders were given a week to complete the

packet (see Appendix for coding packet).

45
 I used Cohen’s Kappa as a statistical measure to check agreement on the framing

categories (Cohen, 1960). The percent of overall agreement was 0.61 on kappa frame

categories. With a 61% overall reliability rate, the agreement is substantial according to

the literature. This reliability rate is acceptable in the social sciences (for kappa),

specifically in regard to content analysis (Babbie, 1997). Statisticians have adopted the

following guidelines for what constitutes as a “good” reliability percentage in this

context: zero to 20% agreement as slight, 21% to 40% agreement as fair, 41% to 60%

agreement as moderate, 61% to 80% agreement as substantial, and 81% to 99%

agreement as “almost perfect” (Landis & Koch, 1977).

Step Five: Close reading for sources. To determine the sources, I noted the

individuals and organizations named. Recall that by “sources,” I mean any individual

mentioned or identified in the “online coverage.” Earlier, I discussed that a “source” is

similar to an “opinion leader” in that they are both transmitters of information. Therefore,

I counted the frequency of sources in the key event data. For example, sources included

Oprah Winfrey, Allan Ball, HBO Films, miscellaneous researchers, Alok Jha of Guardian

UK, The Lacks Family, and various research institutions.

To further clarify the manifest nature of this type of information, I will provide

examples from the data. Oprah Winfrey’s flagship online enterprise, Oprah.com, was

indexed by the Google alerts and linked on rebeccaskloot.com (Skloot, 2010c). The text

read: “Oprah.com recommends The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks as an Ideal Mothers

Day Gift… Oprah.com recommended 16 books as ideal mother’s day gifts, and The

Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks was one of the first on the list” (n.p).

46
 Alan Ball was mentioned with Oprah Winfrey and HBO films often, however

there were a few examples when Ball was the primary source. By primary source, I mean

the only source mentioned within the content item.3 Those instances were found in

content items associated with his previous production work with other HBO projects.

One example came from a True Blood fan page, a site called: “True Blood News: A place

to feed your obsession” (2010). True Blood is a project that Ball produced, a mini-series

about vampires. A blogger who used the pseudonym “Lividity” wrote a post titled “True

Blood’s Alan Ball teams up with Oprah Winfrey.” The content details Ball’s involvement

with the project and provides a synopsis of the book. The post features a photo of Ball

and alongside the text are six advertisements for vampire-related merchandise. Lividity

quotes Ball regarding his excitement about his next project (HeLa biopic): “I fell in love

with it,’ Ball said. ‘I thought it would be a perfect movie for HBO. This is going to be a

journey that we’ll all remember for the rest of our lives” (n.p.). For a True Blood fan,

Alan Ball’s involvement is the salient aspect of this HeLa content item.

In summary, the methods for the current study are iterative and emergent. In the

next section I will discuss how this procedure attends to the research questions that guide

the study. The results and analysis will be presented concurrently as prescribed by the

mixed-method approach to social research (Creswell & Plano Clark 2006).

3
If there was more than one source, each name was noted. In other words, unlike the frame categories,
more than once source could be attributed to a single content item.
47
 Chapter 5

RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

The current study is guided by research questions that facilitate qualitative and

quantitative inquiry. John W. Creswell and Vicki L. Plano Clark defined a research

paradigm that encompasses both methodological approaches, called mixed method

design. Creswell and Plano Clark (2006) stated, “Mixed methods research is ‘practical’ in

the sense that the researcher is free to use all methods possible to address a research

problem” (p. 10). A common approach to mixed methods analysis is data visualization,

supported by a rich history in science communication (Onwuegbuzie & Dickinson, 2008;

Trumbo, 2001; Tufte, 2006). The process summarizes and highlights important aspects

of the data for comparative purposes, while simultaneously providing context (Dickinson,

Hines & Onwuegbuzie, 2006; Onwuegbuzie & Dickinson, 2008; Tashakkori & Teddie,

1998; Tufte, 2006).

The qualitative component of mixed method design permits the researcher to

report the results and follow with analysis. For example, Thomas R. Lindlof and Bryan C.

Taylor, in their book Qualitative Communication Research Methods, note that one of the

strengths of qualitative analysis is the ability to revise one’s views after examining data

(2002, p. 223). In the specific context of mixed method analysis the act of reducing and

highlighting the data in a visual manner is iterative, inductive process that can help

researchers see evidence. For example, Miles and Huberman (1994) stated that the

purpose of a data visualization is for the researcher to “see what is happening and either

draw justified conclusions or move on to the next step of analysis the display suggests is

48
useful” (p. 11). Thus, in this section I will present the results through data visualization,

followed by an interpretive analysis and consider what the findings mean.

Recall that I undertook a multi-step methodological process. I first collected data

of the online coverage on The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks by signing up for Google

alerts. The data collection yielded 3,838 units of online content from February 7 to

August 5, 2010. I mapped the data to visually describe the book release over time while

observing spikes in coverage (key events). I developed criteria for a textual analysis of

the data. I then performed a close reading of the content items culled from the sampling

procedure, and identified the emergent frames within the online coverage and placed

them into categories. I returned to the data and performed a close reading of the content

items in the key data points (identified in step 2) while recording the prominent frame

category for all online coverage in these zones of heightened activity. I then observed

mentions of sources in the same content items.

In the following section, I will attend to each research question by discussing the

map, emergent frames, sources, and finally, the intersection of sources and frame

categories.

The Google Alert Map

In order to describe the diffusion of the online coverage and address Research

Question 1, I mapped the data. Figure 2 in the preceding chapter shows the pattern of

activity that displays the diffusion of online coverage surrounding the release of The

Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. Six points are prominent visually: February 16, March

49
29, April 22, May 12, June 21 and July 21. Looking closely, a pattern emerges. May 12 is

the highest peak, nearly midway through the time frame, and then the activity is relatively

quiet from May 12 to around June 2. The key events emerge every three to four weeks.

The overall activity is an oscillation, varying over time and repetitive in nature

with dramatic peaks and valleys. Since there are very few plateaus, it seems that the

online coverage was made of spurs of activity. Interestingly, there appears to be a major

dip in coverage immediately before each major data spike. In the current study, the

difference in coverage can be relative silence (three alerts) to a major jump (29 alerts) as

seen in February 16.

The spurs of activity seem to follow a news routine pattern, as there are no

Fridays or weekends in the key events: February 16 is a Tuesday; March 29 is a Monday;

April 22 is a Thursday; June 21 is a Monday; and July, 21 is a Wednesday. Furthermore,

no major spikes occurred on a Sunday, one key event fell a Wednesday, and two were 24

hours from falling on a Wednesday. At this point, the overall pattern of diffusion

provides insight on how the message spread. Therefore, by creating a map of alerts over

time, I effectively answered Research Question 1: How was The Immortal life of

Henrietta Lacks diffused online? Next, to delve deeper into these findings, I looked at

messages themselves: emergent frames.

Emergent Frames

Turning to the Research Question 2a, What emergent frames are associated with

diffusion of The Immortal life of Henrietta Lacks?, I performed a close reading of all

50
content items in the six key event days and then grouped the frames into 10 categories

(See Table 2). My intent was to indentify emergent frames in order to lay the ground

work for a deeper explanation of heightened online activity during specific points in time

(Research Question 2b).

The unknown (or indeterminate) category was most prevalent with 55 counts in a

pool of 233 (23.6%) followed by the science category at 17.2% (n= 40); the lists category

at 13.7% (n=32); the exploitation category at 10.3% (n=24); the social reading category

at 9% (n=21); the book publicity and Rebecca Skloot categories both at 7.7% (n=18); the

ethics category at 6.4% (n=15); the projection category at 3.4% (n=8); and finally, the

other category at .01% (n=2). Recall that the unknown (or indeterminate) is a category

for content for which no one frame could be determined. Table 2 represents categories by

frequency and percentage in all key events (N=233).

51
Table 2.

Categories by Frequency and Percentage of all Key Events

Category Frequency Percentage

Unknown* 55 23.6%

Science 40 17.2%

Lists 32 13.7%

Exploitation 24 10.3%

Social Reading 21 9.0%

Book Publicity 18 7.7%

Rebecca Skloot 18 7.7%

Ethics 15 6.4%

Projection 8 3.4%

Other* 2 0. 01%

Total 233 100%

N=233 represents the total number of web pages in the six days of key events. Recall that unknown and
other are categories, not frames.

In summary, science emerged as the most dominant, definable frame category

across all key events. Recall the science category captures breakthrough research that

utilized HeLa cells. These include items focusing on in-vitro technology, the Polio

vaccine, treatment for sexually transmitted infections, and cancer breakthroughs. Lists

was the second most dominant category. Recall that the lists category included cases

where the title The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks is listed with no other content

related to the book. Examples include: best seller lists, bit torrents, retail lists and library

lists and includes blog postings such as widgets that display “what I’m reading.” Looking

52
at source data (Research Questions 3a and 3b) will help illuminate why the list category

emerged so often, because the category is tied to retailers and book reviewers. The third

most prominent category across all data sets was exploitation. Rebecca Skloot’s book

was about an impoverished African-American woman who had her cells cultured without

her knowledge, and the subject matter may have spurred discussions of exploitation and

racism.

To further understand what factors encouraged the emergence of certain frames, I

will analyze frame emergence by key event to establish whether patterns of activity (in

the publicity campaign) may have been a factor. Therefore, in the following section, I

will address Research Question 2b: Do any discernable patterns describe the frequency of

frames that emerged in the online diffusion of The Immortal life of Henrietta Lacks?

Emergent Frames by Key Event

My next objective was to see if the frames followed any discernable patterns. I

then examined each of the six key event days for prominent frame categories. On

February 16, the prominent frames were the Rebecca Skloot and lists categories (13.8%),

followed by exploitation, science, and book publicity categories (10.3%). On March 29,

the prominent frames were the science and lists categories (17.9%), followed by the

exploitation, book publicity and social reading categories (10.3%)4. On April 22, the

prominent frame was the ethics category (15%) followed by the science and social

reading categories (12.5%). On May 12, the prominent frame was the exploitation

4
I discuss any categories that comprised at least 10% of the total coverage in the key event day (Neuendorf,
2002).
53
category (24%) followed by the science (14%), Rebecca Skloot (12%) and book publicity

(10%) categories. On June 21, the prominent frame was the science category (32.6%)

followed by the lists category (11.6%). On July 21, the prominent frame was the lists

category (28.1%), followed by the social reading category (21.9%) and the science

category (12.5%).

54
Table 3.

Frame Categories by Key Event

February 16, 2010 March 29, 2010

Category Count % Category Count %

Unknown 8 27.6% Science 7 17.9%

Lists 4 13.8% Lists 7 17.9%

Skloot 4 13.8% Unknown 6 15.4%

Exploitation 3 10.3% Exploitation 4 10.3%

Science 3 10.3% Book Publicity 4 10.3%

Book
Publicity 3 10.3% Social Reading 4 10.3%

Ethics 2 6.9% Ethics 2 5.1%

Projection 1 3.4% Projection 2 5.1%

Social
Reading 1 3.4% Skloot 2 5.1%

Other 0 0.0% Other 1 3.0%

Total 29 100% Total 39 100%

55
Table 3.

Frame Categories by Key Event (continued)

April 22, 2010 May 12, 2010

Category Count % Category Count %

Unknown 13 32.5% Unknown 13 26.0%

Ethics 6 15.0% Exploitation 12 24.0%

Science 5 12.5% Science 7 14.0%

Social
5 12.5% Skloot 6 12.0%
Reading
Lists 3 7.5% Book Publicity 5 10.0%
Book
3 7.0% Lists 4 8.0%
Publicity
Exploitation 2 5.0% Ethics 1 2.0%

Skloot 2 7.5% Projection 1 2.0%

Projection 1 2.5% Social Reading 1 2.0%

Other 0 0.0% Other 0 0.0%

Total 40 100% Total 50 100%

56
Table 3.

Frame Categories by Key Event (continued)

June 21, 2010 July 21, 2010

Category Count % Category Count %

Science 14 32.6% Lists 9 28.1%

Social
Unknown 9 20.9% Reading 7 21.9%

Lists 5 11.6% Unknown 6 18.8%

Ethics 4 9.3% Science 4 12.5%

Exploitation 3 7.0% Skloot 3 9.4%

Book
Publicity 3 7.0% Projection 2 6.3%

Social
Reading 3 7.0% Other 1 3.1%

Projection 1 2.3% Projection 0 0.0%

Skloot 1 2.3% Ethics 0 0.0%

Book
Other 0 0.0% Publicity 0 0.0%

Total 43 100% Total 32 100%

To summarize, Table 3 illustrates a breakdown of each frame category that

appeared on the six key event days. (Recall that the goal of the current research is not to

track a single frame through time, but to provide a snapshot of what frames were

prominent during heightened periods of activity.) Table 2 and Table 3 display the same

data set, but Table 3 provides an additional level of detail: frames by specific key event

day. Another way to look at the data is to create a figure to help make key event trends

more evident. Thus, Figure 3 provides a way to identify possible patterns. Here, one can

57
see that five frame categories (out of nine) appeared on each key event day: science

(17.2%), lists (13.7%), social reading (9.0%), Skloot (7.7%) and projection (3.4%)

(recall that unknown is not a frame category). To understand what other elements could

be involved, I will discuss each frame category in relation to how it emerged in each of

the six key events, and later, what sources were associated with the frames.

58
Figure 3.

Categories by Key Event

Looking at Figure 3, the top three categories unknown, science and lists display

the same six key event dates. However, the fourth highest category, exploitation looks

different. For the exploitation category, there are no occurrences on July 21, and more

than half of the total occurrences on May 12. Conversely, social reading had a major

presence on July 21 and very little presence on May 12.

Book publicity (7.7%, overall) did not have any presence in July 21 but was

somewhat evenly divided among the five earlier key events. The Rebecca Skloot category

(7.7%, overall) had a minimal presence on June 21 (2.3%) and sizeable presence on May
59
12 (2.0%). The ethics category (6.4%, overall) had no presence on July 21 (0.0%) but a

noticeable presence on April 22 (15.0%), which is the first time (other than unknown)

that April 22 emerges as a key day for a category. The projection category (3.4%,

overall) is nearly spread evenly across all key events, signifying a small smattering in the

overall frame data. The Other category (0.01%, overall) appears just twice, on March 29

and on July 21.

In addressing Research Question 2b (Do any discernable patterns describe the

frequency of frames that emerged in the online diffusion of The Immortal life of

Henrietta Lacks?) most frame categories are present throughout the key event days.

However, there are a few exceptions: for example, the appearance of the exploitation

frame, which has an unusually high concentration on May 12 (compared to other

categories). In summary I found that there were no major differences in how each frame

category diffused, with the exception of exploitation not appearing on July 21 at all. The

book publicity and ethics categories also lacked a presence on July 21, however, since

these frames were not prominent categories, it is difficult to draw any conclusions based

on this limited snapshot. Therefore, to understand what factors may have contributed to

some frame categories gaining traction over others at specific points in time, next I turned

to sources.

60
Sources

To explore which sources are associated with online diffusion of The Immortal

life of Henrietta Lacks (Research Question 3a), I counted sources mentioned in the web

pages from the key event days. Among the 201 sources mentioned, Oprah Winfrey was

most prominent at 15.9%. Allan Ball (True Blood and Six Feet Under producer) followed

with 11.9% (See Table 4).

61
Table 4.

Sources

Source Count %

Oprah Winfrey 32 15.9%

Alan Ball 24 11.9%

Miscellaneous* 23 11.4%

HBO Films 19 9.4%

Newspapers 18 8.9%

Scientists and Researchers 17 8.4%

Science writers 11 5.4%

Universities/Research Institutions 7 3.4%

Producers 6 2.9%

Radio shows 6 2.9%

Lacks Family Members 5 2.4%

Amazon.com 5 2.4%

David Prete (actor, Skloot’s partner) 5 2.4%

Fritzi Bodenheimer (public speaking coach) 5 2.4%

Steve Ember (voice-over actor) 5 2.4%

Popular Science Publications 4 1.9%

Libraries/Book Groups 3 1.4%

John Moore
3 1.4%
(Moore v. Regents of the University of California)
Stephen Colbert (comedian) 3 1.4%

Total 201 100%

Table 4 displays the groups of sources (N=201) that emerged within the content units of the key event data.

*Miscellaneous is a group that refers to any individuals or organizations that were less than one percent of
the overall source data and did not apply to the other collapsed categories because they were too dispersed
to constitute their own group. A detailed description of the rationale behind group collapsing process
follows. However, an uncategorized list of sources by key event date is available in Appendix A.

62
 While analyzing the data, I found a scattering of diverse, disparate sources in the

online diffusion of The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. To better understand the

sources, I organized them into groups using the following criteria: uniqueness (the lack of

commonality between sources) or frequency over 10% of total data. For further clarity,

the miscellaneous group referred to any individuals or organizations that garnered less

than one percent of the overall source data and those that did not fit within other

collapsed categories (conceptually). Sources relegated to the miscellaneous group fell

within two criteria: 1) less than one percent of the data and 2) not applicable to the

following collapsed categories: Newspapers; Science writers; Producers; Universities

and Research Institutions; Lacks Family Members; Radio shows; Popular Science

Publications; and Libraries and Book Groups. Examples of miscellaneous sources

include: TED Talks, a nonprofit consortium that specializes in technology, education and

design trends and the web-based collaborative encyclopedia, wikipedia.com.

For further detail on how I categorized other sources, the newspaper group

contained sources such as The New York Times; The LA Times; The Chicago Tribune;

The Philadelphia Independent; The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post.

Science writers were often affiliated with newspapers but had a special status if they were

continuously referred to by name, secondary to their organization. Science writers

included individuals such as Alok Jha (Guardian UK), Liz Hunt (UK Telegraph), and

Maggie Korth-Baker (boingboing.net). Producers included those affiliated with the HBO

biopic such as Kate Forte and Peter Macdissi, as well as those that have been affiliated

with other productions pertaining to HeLa cells such as Adam Curtis (who produced a

63
BBC documentary called The Way of the Flesh). Universities and Research Institutions

pertained to sources such as to Arizona State University, recently embroiled in litigation

regarding genetic ownership, as well as various institutions that Skloot visited during her

book tour, such as Chico State, Columbia University, and the University of California at

San Diego. Lacks Family Members most often pertained to Lacks’ children specifically

Deborah, Elsie and Gary Lacks. Radio Shows included NPR’s Fresh Air with Terry

Gross, Radiolab; Deborah Cameron with ABC Sydney; and WHYY’s Radio Times.

Popular Science Publications include Smithsonian Magazine, Wired Magazine and the

Discovery Channel’s Not Exactly Rocket Science. Libraries and Book Groups included

Newport News Public Library and Caitlin Gable (a school in Portland, OR) science

teachers’ resource group.

I found that the 201 sources were scattered throughout each key event date with a

few exceptions. For example, miscellaneous (11.4), HBO Films (9.4%), newspapers

(8.9%) and individual scientists and researchers (8.4%) were mentioned with some

frequency, and they comprised of 65.9% of the total data. Exceptions to this pattern were

individual science writers (5.4%) and all of the sources that had a frequency below

(5.4%).

In summary, prominent sources were Oprah Winfrey and Alan Ball. However,

like observing frames in key event data, I wanted to look closer to see if some sources (or

source categories) had a stronger presence than others. Next, my intent was to explore

whether the presence of a source pattern was associated with a specific key event date.

64
Source groups by key event

To address Research Question 3b: Do any discernable patterns describe the

frequency of sources that emerged in the online diffusion of The Immortal life of

Henrietta Lacks?, I created an additional figure. Figure 4 illustrates which sources

appeared on which key event.

65
Figure 4.
Source Frequency by Key Event

* Recall the miscellaneous group refers to any individuals or organizations that garnered less than one
percent of the overall source data and did not apply to the other collapsed categories.

Turning to Figure 4, one can see which sources were dominant during the six clusters of

heightened activity. Oprah Winfrey is the most frequent source, appearing almost entirely

on May 12, with a few occurrences on June 21. Likewise, the second most frequent

source is Alan Ball who appears only on May 12. Miscellaneous appears throughout the

key events (recall that miscellaneous is a source group that refers to any individuals or

organizations that were less than one percent of the overall source data and did not apply

66
to the other collapsed categories because they were too dispersed to constitute their own

group.) However, due to the nature of the miscellaneous group, a collection of scattered

sources that lack commonality with one another, this pattern is not particularly

meaningful in drawing conclusions regarding influential sources. The fourth most

frequent source is HBO films which only appeared on May 12. Oprah Winfrey, Alan Ball

and HBO Films all are prominent on May 12 because at that time, an announcement was

made regarding a Henrietta Lacks movie, according to the information provided by the

close-reading procedure. Winfrey accounted for 32 of the 84 source mentions on May 12

(38.1% of the source mentions on May 12). HBO Films and True Blood producer Allan

Ball were also possibly associated with this spike because of their involvement with a

proposed movie about Henrietta Lacks.

The newspaper group displayed a presence in February 16, June 21, and July 21.

Other than the miscellaneous group, the newspaper group had the strongest presence on

February 16. Like opinion leaders in diffusion, the newspaper group may have served to

legitimize the book in the earliest stage of the publicity campaign (Rogers, 2005).

The next largest source group, scientists and researchers, had the highest

occurrence on April 22. When the science writers group occurred, it was most prominent

on June 21. Of the 45 sources in the science writers group, many were writing for British

publications, for example: Alok Jha (Guardian UK science writer) was mentioned seven

times and Liz Hunt (UK Telegraph science writer) was mentioned twice. The universities

and research institution group mirrored the scientists and researchers pattern, with the

exception of appearing on June 21. When the producers group occurred, it was most

67
prominent on May 12. This insight is not surprising because producers are typically

associated with the entertainment industry, and were perhaps tied to the movie

announcement in some way.

When the radio show group occurred, it was most prominent on February 16,

similar to the newspaper group. When the Lacks family group occurred, it was most

prominent on February 16. The Amazon.com source occurred mostly February 16. The

next source is David Prete. Prete is Skloot’s partner, and the videographer of the publicity

trailers for the book tour according to the information provided by the close-reading

procedure. When Prete occurred as a source, he was most prominent of March 29.

Both Fritzi Bodenheimer and Steve Ember had a strong, but singular, presence on

July 21. The close-reading procedure indicated that these two sources published an

interview about the origin of HeLa cells based on content from The Immortal Life of

Henrietta Lacks. The interview was part of coursework meant for English as a Second

Language (ESL) students to expand their English proficiency.

The popular science publication group appeared evenly in every key event day

with the exception of July 21. Next, Libraries and book groups appeared in small but

proportional amounts on February 16, April 22, and May 12. Recall that in the Immortal

Life of Henrietta Lacks, Skloot mentions a man, John Moore who sued his doctor for

selling his spleen. In the source data, John Moore is mentioned multiple times, with the

greatest number of occurrences on June 16. Finally, comedian Stephen Colbert appeared

on March 29, April 22, and May 12.

68
 Looking at how sources and key events intersect, a pattern emerges among the

prominent sources. Oprah Winfrey and Alan Ball occur almost exclusively on May 12.

Together, Winfrey and Ball comprise of almost a quarter of all source mentions but are

rarely mentioned again in the subsequent key events. The third most prominent source

(after miscellaneous) is HBO Films which also appeared exclusively on May 12. In

summary, the three most prominent sources emerged on the same key event day and were

all associated with an announcement about a forthcoming Henrietta Lacks movie. How,

then, was this movie announcement framed, in addition to other source-related content?

Thus, my next objective was to explore whether the presence of a source was associated

with a specific frame pattern.

Comparing Sources to Frame Categories

Recall Research Question 4; Do source patterns have any association to frame

patterns observed in the diffusion of The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks? By

examining the relationship between source and frame, I can link together framing and

diffusion literature. That is, I can see what role opinion leaders within a social network

have on a salience transfer. To return to the literature, sources have the ability to frame

messages that create media agendas. Therefore, if the media have the ability to set the

public agenda, then sources become agents of diffusion because they transfer salience

(McCombs & Shaw, 1972; Rogers 1995).

In the current study, one way to investigate source association with potential

activity-spurring frames is to: 1) look at how sources are clustered on key event days and,

69
2) overlay sources with frames by key events. Therefore, in Figure 5, I overlaid two bar

charts. That is, I took the frame categories for each key event and compared them to the

sources mentioned on that day (See Figure 5).

70
Figure 5.

Framing Categories by Source

*Recall that the miscellaneous is a group that refers to any individuals or organizations that were less than
one percent of the overall source data and did not apply to the other collapsed groups.

71
 By overlaying the two frequency tables of frames and sources, I could see how

the type of frames intersected with such sources as Oprah Winfrey, Alan Ball, and HBO

Films. For example, the source with the greatest frequency, Oprah Winfrey, overlapped

with the following frame categories: exploitation, science, lists, book publicity, Rebecca

Skloot, and social reading.

The newspaper group also displayed a strong relationship with the exploitation

frame; a similar pattern found with sources associated with the Henrietta Lacks movie

announcement. Next, I examined the scientists and researchers group which was closely

associated with science and ethical categories. The universities and research institutions

group exhibited the following frame categories: exploitation, ethics, Rebecca Skloot, and

social reading.

The producer group was most commonly associated with the exploitation

category. Because producers often work in the entertainment industry, a connection to the

Henrietta Lacks movie (e.g., Peter Macdissi and Kate Forte) mirrored Oprah Winfrey,

Alan Ball, and HBO Films. The next source group, radio shows, displayed the following

frame categories: science, ethics, book publicity, and Rebecca Skloot.

The Lacks family members intersected with just two frame categories,

exploitation and Rebecca Skloot. In regard to the strong association with exploitation,

latent factors such as themes from the book may have influenced this relationship, or the

pattern could have emerged due to the way the frame category was designed to include

discussions of race, as the Lackses are an African-American family.

72
 The Amazon.com source intersected with the science and lists categories, but

mostly lists. One reason could be that since Amazon is an e-retailer content mentioning

Amazon was related to listings or adjectives such as Amazon top-seller, etc. The next

three sources intersected with just one frame category: David Prete with the book

publicity category and Fritzi Bodenheimer and Steve Ember, both with the social reading

category. Recall that Prete is Skloot’s partner and tour videographer; therefore it makes

sense that this source is closely coupled with the book publicity category. Regarding

Bodenheimer and Ember, recall that they were both involved in English as a Second

Language (ESL) curriculum. In the close-reading procedure I found that content related

to these two sources appeared on various Asian websites. The popular science publication

group, the libraries and book clubs group, John Moore and Stephen Colbert all account

for 10 percent or less of the total source and frame intersections. Therefore, patterns at

this level are difficult to assess since the numbers are so small.

Summary

I identified how The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks was diffused by mapping

the Google Alerts across a 180 day period. To further describe what factors may have

accelerated the diffusion, I identified heightened clusters of activity, key events. Within

those key events I identified frame and source patterns. I found that the three most

prominent frames were science, lists and exploitation. I found that Oprah Winfrey, Alan

Ball and HBO Films dominated the source data. Winfrey and Ball emerged prolifically

on May 12, however, they did have a noticeable presence in the subsequent key event

73
dates. My general questions about source and frame patterns provided the necessary

foundation to explore the cornerstone of the current study (Research Question 4), the

juncture of frame patterns and source occurrences. For example, Oprah Winfrey had the

farthest reach of all sources, and was associated with a multitude of frames (seven

different categories), yet occurred in a singular moment in time (almost entirely on May

12). What do these findings about influential sources and prominent frames indicate

about how The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks gained traction online? In the next

section, I will discuss what the frames and associated sources reveal. Specifically, I will

address what this relationship reveals about power. Ultimately, this snapshot of the

book’s diffusion can provide insight on a broader discussion of the landscape of the

internet.

74
 Chapter 6

DISCUSSION

The current case study sought to explore how messages become meaningful

online. My interest links to Walter Lippmann’s notion that we build our knowledge by

extracting information from our experiences and our relationships with mediated

information. However, I also recognize that not all meanings are equal, in the sense that

some ideas become more salient for publics, and I ask, how does this occur?

Some critics, such as Michel Foucault, argue that the ability to create salience is a

form of power, in that publics may be more likely to attend to meanings they find

personally salient. Thus, in order to address how some ideas become more salient, I

examined one phenomenon—the online coverage of a popular science book—to

investigate how some attributes of coverage might help us better understand how

information spreads—diffuses—on the internet. By synthesizing these attributes of

coverage—frames, sources, and the intersection of frames and sources—we can better

understand how meaning is constructed on the internet.

Frames

Recall that one important element of my investigation was the description of how

information was characterized, which I operationalized as “frames” of messages. Here,

the key indicator of online salience is the way the messages are framed. In other words,

frames may reveal audience salience, which becomes a complex concept when you recall

75
that internet users are simultaneously producers and consumers of information (Levinson,

2009).

Although frames varied in terms of their characteristics throughout the 180 day

period after the book’s launch, some frames dominated online coverage: science, lists and

exploitation. The science, lists and exploitation frame categories tell us what internet

users found most salient in the online discourse surrounding The Immortal Life of

Henrietta Lacks. For example, by focusing on cancer research, listing the book as a top-

seller, or by critically examining racial topics, the message was more likely to gain

traction than those of other frame categories.

I believe science was salient because the book was positioned as a popular

science book, so substantively speaking, this makes sense. (Recall that the science

category encompassed topics such as the medical advances that resulted from the use of

HeLa cells.) I believe lists was salient for three reasons. Retailers such as Amazon.com

who listed the book may have more online capital than average, such as high visibility on

search engines based on content production cycles and high visitor traffic. The popularity

of the Blogger “What I’m Reading” widget throughout the data also contributed to the

lists prominence. Blogger is a blogging platform owned by Google (Johnson, 2003). A

Google bias may have contributed to the high number of Blogger entries retrieved by the

Google Alerts. A third possibility for the prominence of the lists category is the nature of

the case study subject—a book. The publishing industry often promotes books based on

readership or sales, fertile ground for a proliferation of content based on lists or rankings.

76
 Exploitation appears to be salient due to the emphasis on drama and controversy.

Nisbet, Brossard, and Kroepsch (2003) stated that the science topics that get the most

coverage in the media are often the most dramatized, particularly in areas such as stem

cell research. The book was about a scientific topic, HeLa cells. However, the discourse

regarding the book touched on topics such as racism and poverty, because Skloot

familiarized the reader with Lacks’ upbringing in rural Virginia and her experiences a

patient in the “colored ward” at Johns Hopkins. For one reason or another, these three

frames resonated the strongest with internet users as they were the frames associated with

the highest clusters of online activity.

The current study sought to understand the linkage between online activity and

audience salience, and was grounded in the synthesis of framing and diffusion literature.

In other words, if framing selects aspects of perceived reality with the intent of

convincing audiences that the message is important, then framing and diffusion intersect

at the salience transfer (Entman, 1993). Here, salience transfer describes the alignment of

the audience’s interpretation of a message with the objective of the information producer.

This approach to salience transfer is a deeper description of the process that occurs within

McCombs and Shaw’s (1972) agenda-setting theory. To summarize, you can gain insight

on what people find important by the traces of activity they leave on the internet. In the

context of the current case study, those participating in the online discourse surrounding

The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks generally found the scientific aspects of the

narrative most salient.

77
Sources

In addition to frames offering insight into the meanings arising from coverage, the

use of key sources in online content tells us about individuals and organizations linked to

messages. In the classic diffusion literature, scholars argue that sources have the ability to

frame messages and thus impart meanings through the selection of some interpretations

over others. By framing Rebecca Skloot’s book as a treatise on the exploitation of a poor

African-American mother in the 1950s, some sources thus “set the frame” and created

meanings associated with coverage. Oprah Winfrey and a forthcoming movie adaptation

of the book were associated with much of the coverage, and the nature of Winfrey and

her associates (Allan Ball and HBO Films) made salient the exploitation aspects of the

book.

According to Rogers, these sources have the power to incite institutional change

because their decisions can trigger a series of behavioral responses among other adopters.

However, the current study explored Rogers’ opinion leaders in a new context (online

coverage) and found that it was not just the opinion leaders themselves who legitimized a

message, but those individuals who mentioned the opinion leaders. Here, the opinion

leaders take a somewhat passive role, as internet users cite them as sources to diffuse

their own messages. In other words, internet users are more than followers of opinion

leaders, internet users become conduits of information by exposing the message to

networks beyond the information producer’s network.

78
The Intersection of Frames and Sources

Observing the intersection of frames and sources allowed me to see what role

sources within a social network have on a salience transfer. To return to the literature,

sources who have the ability to frame messages can decide what others perceive as

important. Recall Foucault’s argument, that this ability to decide what is important—to

shape reality—confers a tremendous amount of power.

Therefore, what does the process of salience transfer look like on the internet,

based on the current case study? According to the data, the process appears to be

dynamic, episodic and constantly negotiated. For example, mentions of Oprah Winfrey,

Alan Ball and HBO Films occur almost exclusively on May 12 and are rarely mentioned

again in the subsequent key events. Here, it appears that source associations were tied to

a series of smaller events that cycled throughout the main event of the book publicity

campaign. This series of smaller events could have been necessary to maintaining

momentum in coverage. The Google Alert map (the indexing of the key words “Henrietta

Lacks” in the first six months of the book’s release) also supports this episodic

observation as there were dips in coverage preceding every major spike, and there were

no plateaus or sustained trends in activity. The findings also indicate that well-known or

powerful names were most likely to be associated with a diverse array of frames. Recall

that it is not Oprah Winfrey or Alan Ball using exploitative or scientific frames

themselves, but the internet users who produce content mentioning them as sources. For

example, looking back at Figure 5, one can see that Winfrey has the farthest reach (that

is, the highest frequency) and is associated with seven different frames. This pattern

79
provides insight on the content creators who cited Winfrey as a source. The current study

found that source mentions were more influential when there was a plurality of frames,

and frames more influential when the source involved was not as well-known. In other

words, it was less important how a content item was framed than who the content item

mentioned—unless the sources were not seen as powerful (by Foucault’s estimation).

Examples include the Lacks family members and producers groups (recall this group

comprises lesser known producers than Alan Ball, such as Kate Forte and Peter Macdissi)

who were closely tied to the exploitation frame.

Because Oprah Winfrey and Alan Ball had a greater number of mentions, perhaps

there was more opportunity for them to be associated with a greater number of frames.

Yet, why did they garner so many mentions in the first place? The obvious answer is that

they are more influential than those sources with fewer mentions. It appears that

influential names have farther reach in diffusing information in social networks, because

they have an audience “that will go to bat for them” to spread a message. This insight

tells us that legitimacy is important on the internet, especially if you want your message

to diffuse quickly. However, this observation adds a unique spin on diffusion theory,

because it is not the opinion leaders themselves that are accelerating the spread of a

message, but a legion of dedicated audience members, fans, or followers communicating

on their behalf by aligning their messages with sources.

Coming full circle, recall that power is “spun through discourse” and that, to

understand power, we should focus on the “materials” and “tactics” of power in discourse

(Foucault, 1980). In the current study, these “materials” and “tactics” are the frames and

80
sources associated with The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. Together, frames and

sources tell us a story about how messages gain traction online. Here, frames serve as an

indicator of audience salience and sources accelerate the message by legitimizing content

in a social network.

Summary

The current study fills a void in the literature by describing of the process of

diffusion in the lifecycle of an online event through the lens of framing theory. The

current study also attends to previously unanswered questions about salience in the

context of the internet. Three key insights were gleaned, which I will discuss from a

prescriptive perspective. First, if you want to set a message in motion online, frame the

message in a format conducive to sharing among information consumers (who in turn,

will become information producers if you succeed in salience transfer). Second, provoke

coverage if online activity wanes: a series of smaller events can sustain the lifecycle of

the larger event. For example, Rebecca Skloot was highly active in her book promotion

activities (Kellogg, 2010). She tapped her professional networks, leveraged social media,

and conducted a busy schedule of appearances all across the country. According to

Rogers’ diffusion theory, every promotional action Skloot took had the potential to reach

an opinion leader of an expanded social network outside of her own. These appearances

garnered attention from people within Oprah Winfrey’s network an even Winfrey

directly. For example, on Oprah.com, Winfrey was described as reading the book all in

one sitting and that she “couldn’t put the book down” (Oprah.com, 2010, n.p.). This leads

81
us to the third insight: if you want a successful online campaign, align your message with

an opinion leader. The followers, fans, and readers of that particular opinion leader (or

source) will add traction to your campaign by the rapid sharing of your message

throughout other social networks. However, this third step appears to have a major

drawback, as evidenced in the findings—the greater the diffusion on behalf of a powerful

source, the greater plurality of frames. This means that, unless you are someone like

Oprah Winfrey who can “set a frame” in a mere mention, the farther the message spreads,

the less control you have over how that message is framed. However, recall that framing

becomes inconsequential after the message has been widely adopted (Kennedy & Fiss,

2009). Therefore, a plurality of frames should be viewed as a step toward the

institutionalization of a message, not necessarily a loss of control.

Limitations

An important limitation is the lack of guidance for this type of online research. At

the onset of my study, few researchers had published empirical research about online

coverage specifically pertaining to frames and diffusion, and I borrowed heavily from

scholars who used such methods as “Google Alerts” to capture data. Therefore, I

acknowledge a Google bias in the methodology. This means the current study relies on

unpublicized, constantly changing search algorithms to generate a population of English

language content.

A second weakness with Google Alerts the possibility of populating content that

may not have anything to do with The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. For example, an

82
alert based on the key words “Henrietta Lacks” may actually read “Henrietta lacks the

drive to earn decent grades.” Recall the unknown frame category for content that could

not be read for frames, which comprised nearly one quarter of the total frame data. In

other words, nearly a quarter of the content items could not be read for frames because

much of this material was spam, affiliate marketing, off-topic, expired, etc. This

emergent category still tells us something: it tells us that there is a lot of chatter

containing the key words “Henrietta Lacks.” Though at times nonsensical, alert indexes

indicate that individuals are searching for the words “Henrietta Lacks” and online

marketers are using this to their advantage, by clustering advertising content with those

key words to drive visitors to various sites, unrelated to the book. The prominence of the

unknown category does not diminish the importance of frames in the current study, but

rather bolsters the notion that the internet is an environment with ongoing negotiation and

collaboration. The emphasis on the interpersonal, the fact that individual users remove or

contribute information at any time (even to the detriment of those searching for relevant

content), speaks volumes about the conversational aspect of the medium.

Most of the research to date has examined online frames descriptively. Diffusion

researchers have examined the adoption of innovations or technology as an effect of the

communication of information, while I was interested in examining the process of

diffusion rather than its effects. My exploration into process was challenging: how does

one sift through more than 3,000 web pages to make sense of the qualities of coverage?

Therefore, I decided on a mixed-methodological approach, borrowing from qualitative

and descriptive methods in addition to quantitative methods of cataloging the data, such

83
as frames and sources. My hope is that I have captured some semblance of coverage

through the category-creation, which is admittedly a somewhat rough approach to

examining the data. But I also argue that by conducting a close reading of the content, I

have fleshed out how meanings were constructed in frames and by sources.

I acknowledge that the use of the case study methods (Yin, 2002) has advantages

and drawbacks. One of the strengths of this type of research is that it captures a snapshot

of a larger phenomenon; particularly in an area where few have treaded before. One of

the draw-backs of the mixed-method, single-case methodology is the lack of

generalizability. Yin (2002) states that multi-case studies are stronger than single-case

studies. However in situations where a single-case study is the only feasible option (such

as pilot research) Yin (2002) stated that it can muster methodological rigor if it is well

documented and the data were analyzed to the standards of the particular research

paradigm.

From a quantitative perspective, this research lacks generalizability outside the

context of the current case study (Babbie, 2008). I therefore acknowledge that my

findings cannot be formally generalized to the context of the internet as a whole.

However, I did fulfill the requirements of the single-case, mixed-method approach which

allows me to attend to insights specific to how The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks

diffused online.

My hope is that these findings lay the groundwork for future study particularly in

how frames and sources interact in the diffusion of a message. Areas ripe for future study

could include a more detailed snapshot on an event’s publicity cycle by extending the

84
time frame or comparing coverage to a second popular science book. Further research in

this area may fill in gaps of understanding, particularly in how meaning is constructed in

online social networks.

85
 REFERENCES

Ackland, R., Gibson, R., Lusoli, W. & Ward, S. (2010). Engaging with the public?

Assessing the online presence and communication practices of the

nanotechnology industry. Social Science Computer Review 11 (28), pp. 443-465.

Appadurai, A. (1986). Introduction: Commodities and the Politics of Value, in

The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective, ed. Appadurai,

A. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 3-63.

Arsenault, D. Smith, L.D., and Beauchamp. E.A., (2006). Visual Inscriptions in the

Scientific Hierarchy: Mapping the "Treasures of Science." Science

Communication, 27(3), pp. 376-428.

Babbie, E. (2008). The Basics of Social Research. Cengage Learning.

Benson, R. (2006). News Media as a “Journalistic Field”: What Bourdieu adds to new

institutionalism, and vice versa. Political Communication. 23, pp. 187-202..

Brennan, R. L., & Prediger, D. J. (1981). Coefficient Kappa: Some uses, misuses, and

alternatives. Educational and Psychological Measurement (41), pp. 687-699.

Carey, J. (1995) ‘The Press, Public Opinion, and Public Discourse’, in T. Glasser and

C.Salmon (eds.) Public Opinion and the Communication of Consent,

pp. 373–402. New York: Guilford.

Chabot, S. (2004). Framing, Transnational Diffusion, and African-American

Intellectuals in the Land of Gandhi. International Review of Social History.

49. pp 19-40.

86
Culler, J. (1997). Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cohen, B. C. (1963). “The press and foreign policy”.

Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), pp. 37-46.

Coleman, C.L., Hartley, H. and Kennamer J.D. (2006). Examining Claims makers’

Frames in News Coverage of Direct-to-Consumer Advertising.

Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly. 83, pp. 547–63.

Coleman, C.L., and Dysart, E.V. (2005). Framing of Kennewick Man against the

Backdrop of a Scientific and Cultural Controversy. Science Communication.

27(3). Sage Publications.

Costello, P. (2010). Will Henrietta Lacks now get her due?. Scope. Stanford School of

Medicine. Retrieved April 23, 2010:

http://scopeblog.stanford.edu/2010/04/henrietta_lacks_case/

Covert, M. (2010). Rebecca Skloot’s first book presents the immortal life of Henrietta

Lacks and the debt we owe her. The Oregonian. Retrieved March 29, 2010:

http://www.oregonlive.com/books/index.ssf/2010/02/the_immortal_life_

of_henrietta.html

Creswell, J., and Plano Clark, V.L., (2006) Designing and conducting mixed methods

research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Curtis, A. (1997). The Way of the Flesh. BBC Films.

87
Davenport, E. & Cronin, B. (2000). The citation network as a prototype for representing

trust in virtual environments. Monograph Series. pp. 517-534.

Davidson, W. (1954). Probing the secret of life. Colliers. pp. 78-83.

Dearing, J. (2009). Applying Diffusion of Innovation Theory to Intervention

Development. Research on Social Work Practice. 19(9), pp. 503-518.

Dearing, J. W., & Rogers, E. M. (1996). Agenda-setting. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dickinson, W. B., Hines, C. V., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2006). Graphical analysis

of clandestine methamphetamine laboratories utilizing PROC GMAP: A visual

inventory of activity across the United States. Proceedings of the Thirty-first SAS

Users Group International Conference (Paper 136-31). Cary, NC: SAS Institute.

Retrieved, from http://www2.sas.com/proceedings/sugi31/136-31.pdf

Disclose t.v. (2011). About Us. Retrieved July 8, 2011:

http://www.disclose.tv/action/static/about/

Earl, J. (2006) ‘Pursuing Social Change Online: The Use of Four Protest Tactics on the

Internet’, Social Science Computer Review 24(3), pp. 362-77.

Entman, R. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of

Communication, 43(4), pp. 51-58.

Esser, F., and D'Angelo P., (2003) Framing the Press and Publicity Process in U.S.,

British, and German General Election Campaigns: A Comparative Study of

Metacoverage. International Journal of Press/Politics. 11(3), pp. 44-66.

Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Flanagin, A., Flanagin, C., and Flanagin, J. (2009). Technical code and the social

88
 construction of the internet. New Media and Society, 11(8). pp. 1-19.

Fleiss, J.L. (1981). Statistical methods for rates and proportions (2nd ed.).

New York: John Wiley.

Fraser, N. (1992) ‘Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of

Actually Existing Democracy’, in C. Calhoun (ed.) Habermas and the Public

Sphere, pp. 109–42. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Freeman, L.C. and Webster C.M. (1994). Interpersonal proximity in social and

cognitive space. Social Cognition. 12(3). pp. 223-247.

Foucault, M., (1977). Discipline and Punish. The Birth of the Prison,

London: Penguin Books.

Foucault, M., (1980). Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings,

1972-1977. Hetfordshire: Harvester Press.

Gamson, W. A., & Meyer, D. S. (1996). Framing political opportunity. In D. McAdam,

J. D. McCarthy, & M. N.Zald (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on social

Movements. pp. 275–290. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Grady, J. (2006). Edward Tufte and the Promise of a Visual Social Science. In Visual

Cultures of Science: Rethinking Representational Practices in Knowledge

Building and Science Communication. Hanover and London: Dartmouth College

Press.

Green, S. (2004). A rhetorical theory of diffusion. Academy of Management Review.

29. pp 653–669.

Green, S. E., Li, Y., & Nohria, N. (2009). Suspended in self-spun webs of significance:

89
 Conceptualizing institutionalization as change in argument structure. Academy of

Management Journal. 52. pp 11–36.

Guidarini, L. (2010). Recently Borrowed from My Library. Bluestalking:

Editor at Large of Her Own Life. Retrieved February 16, 2010:

http://bluestalking.typepad.com/the_bluestalking_reader/2010/02/recently-

borrowed-from-my-library.html

Habermas, J. (1962). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry

into a category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge: Polity.

Harris Online (2010). Best Sellers By Area. Harris Online. Retrieved March 28, 2010:

http://harrisonline.blogspot.com/2010/03/best-sellers-by-area.html

Halbwachs, M. (1992). On collective memory. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Hunt, L. (2010). The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks: a bittersweet legacy. The U.K.

Telegraph. Retrieved June 21, 2010:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/7845119/The-Immortal-Life-of-

Henrietta-Lacks-a-bittersweet-legacy.html

Hunter, C.K. (2010). “God’s Final Judgment of Mankind” Disclose.tv. Retrieved

March 29, 2010: http://www.disclose.tv/forum/hmm-wonder-what-s-next-

t19102.html

Jacobs, J, (1961) The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York:

Random House.

Johnson, Steven (2003).Google's Memory Upgrade: How Blogger could do more than

improve Google's Web searches. Slate. Retrieved October 10, 2011:

90
 http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/webhead/2003/03/googles_memory_up

grade.html

Jones, H.W., McKusick, V.A., Harper, P.S., and Wuu, K.D. (1971). George Otto Gey.

(1899-1970). The HeLa cell and a reappraisal of its origin.

Obstetrics and gynecology 38(6), pp. 945-9.

Kaid, L. L., & Wadsworth, A. J. (1989). Content Analysis. In Philip Emmert and Larry L.

Barker (Eds.), Measurement of communication behavior. pp. 197-217. New York:

Longman.

Kellogg, C. (2010). Henrietta Lacks’ ‘Immortal’ roots: science journalist Rebecca Skloot

looks at the woman behind the first human cell line and her unwitting scientific

legacy. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved: June 1, 2010:

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/08/entertainment/la-et-rebecca-skloot8-

2010feb08/3

Kennedy, M.T., and Fiss, P.C. (2009). Institutionalization, Framing and Diffusion:

The logic of TQM adoption and implementation decisions among U.S. hospitals.

Academy of Management Journal. 52(5). pp 879-918.

Kleinberg, J. M. (1999). Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment,

Journal of the ACM (JACM).42(5).

Lacy, S., & Riffe, D. (1996). Sampling error and selecting intercoder reliability samples

for nominal content categories: Sins of omission and commission in mass

communication quantitative research. Journalism & Mass Communication

Quarterly, 73, pp. 969-973.

91
Landis, J.R.; & Koch, G.G. (1977). “The measurement of observer agreement for

categorical data”. Biometrics. 33(1), pp. 159-174.

Leal-Anaya, J. (2010). Ramtha: Immortal Cells, Cancer and the Telomeres.

Ramtha’s School of Enlightenment Newsletter. Retrieved April 21, 2010:

http://www.rse-newsletter.com/2010/04/ramtha-immortal-cells-cancer-and-the-

telomeres/

Levinson, P. (2009) New New Media. Boston: Penguin Academics.

Lindlof, T.R., and Taylor, B.C. (2002). Qualitative Communication Research Methods.

Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Lippmann, W. (1922). The world outside and the pictures in our heads. Public opinion.

pp. 3-32. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company.

Littleton, C. (2010). Ball, Winfrey partner on 'Life': Pair will produce HBO pic via

Harpo. Variety. Retrieved: May, 12 2010.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118019154?refCatId=14

Lividity. (2010). True Blood’s Alan Ball teams up with Oprah Winfrey. True Blood

News: The Place to Feed Your Obsession. Retrieved May 12, 2010:

http://www.trueblood-news.com/true-bloods-alan-ball-teams-up-with-oprah-

winfrey

Lock, M. (2001). The Alienation of Body Tissue and the Biopolitics of Immortalized Cell

Lines. Body and Society. 7(2-3), pp. 63-91. London: Sage Publications.

Lynch, M. (2006). The Production of Images Vision and Revision in the History,

Philosophy, and Sociology of Science. In Visual Cultures of Science: Rethinking

92
 Representational Practices in Knowledge Building and Science Communication

(pp. 26-39). Hanover and London: Dartmouth College Press.

Martin, C.R., (2003). The 1997 United Parcel Service Strike: Framing the Story for

Popular Consumption. The Journal of Communication Inquiry. 27(2) pp. 190-210.

Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

McCombs, M.E. and Shaw, D.L. (1972). The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media.

Public Opinion Quarterly. 36 (2), pp. 176-187.

Meraz, S., (2011). The fight for ‘how to think’: Traditional media, social networks, and

issue interpretation. Journalism. 12 (1), pp. 102-127.

Miles, M.B., and Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis.

Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Molotch, H., and Lester, M. (1975). Accidental news: The great oil spill as local

occurrence and national event. The American Journal of Sociology, 82(2), pp.

235-260.

Mozilla (2011). The Mozilla Manifesto. Retrieved: September 10, 2011.

http://www.mozilla.org/about/manifesto.en.html

Neuendorf, K.A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Sage.

Nisbet, M., Brossard, D. & Kroepsch A. (2003). Framing Science: The stem cell

controversy in an age of press/politics. The International Journal of

Press/Politics. l8(36).

Nisbet, M. & Mooney, C. (2007). Framing Science. Science. 316 (56).

American Association for the Advancement of Science.

93
Oprah.com. (2010). Harpo Films, Alan Ball and HBO Team Up for The Immortal Life of

Henrietta Lacks. Oprah.com. Retrieved May 12, 2010:

http://www.oprah.com/pressroom/Harpo-Films-Alan-Ball-and-HBO-The-

Immortal-Life-of-Henrietta-Lacks

Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Dickinson, W.B., (2008). and Mixed Methods Analysis and

Information Visualization: Graphical Display for Effective Communication of

Research. The Qualitative Report. 13(2) pp. 204-225.

Papacharissi, Z. (2002). The virtual sphere: The internet as a public sphere. New Media

& Society. 4(1). pp. 9-27. Sage.

Postill, J. (2008). Localizing the internet beyond communities and networks. New Media

& Society. 6(10) pp. 413-431.

Price, V., Tewsksbury, D., & Powers, E. (1997). Switching trains of thought:

The impact of news frames on readers' cognitive responses. Communication

Research. (24) pp. 481-506.

Putnam, R.D. (1996). The strange disappearance of civic America.

The American Prospect 24(1), pp. 34–48.

Randolph, J. J. (2005). Free-marginal multirater kappa: An alternative to Fleiss'

fixed-marginal multirater kappa. Paper presented at the Joensuu University

Learning and Instruction Symposium 2005, Joensuu, Finland,

October 14-15th, 2005.

Randolph, J. J. (2008). Online Kappa Calculator. Retrieved May 4, 2011, retrieved from

http://justus.randolph.name/kappa

94
Reardon, R. (2010). ASFA AP Biol, Week 30: Bleeding out, Neurologically Speaking.

ASFA AP Biology: Big ideas and tight junctions. Retrieved March 29, 2010:

http://asfaapbio.wordpress.com/2010/03/29/asfa-ap-biol-week-30-bleeding-out-

neurologically-speaking/

Rogers, M. (1976). “The Double-Edged Helix” Rolling Stone. (29).

Rogers, E.M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Russell, N. (2009). The New Men: Scientists at Work in Popular British Fiction Between

the Early 1930s and the Late 1960s. Science Communication. 31(1), pp. 29-56.

Schuler, D. (2004). Shaping the network society: The new role of civil society in

cyberspace.

Schudson, M. (1997). Why conversation is not the soul of democracy. Critical Studies

in Mass Communication. 14(4), pp. 1–13.

Skloot, R. (2010a). The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. New York: Crown Publishers.

Skloot, R. (2010b). The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks Book Tour Trailer Part 1.

Culture Dish. Retrieved March 29, 2010:http://scienceblogs.com/culturedish/

2010/03/the_immortal_life_of_henrietta_3.php

Skloot, R. (2010c). Oprah.com Recommends The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks as

an Ideal Mothers Day Gift. Rebecca Skloot: Journalist, Teacher, Author of The

Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. Retrieved May 12, 2010:

http://rebeccaskloot.com/2010/05/oprah-com-recommends-the-immortal-life-of-

henrietta-lacks-as-an-ideal-mothers-day-gift/

Siegel, S., & Castellan, (1988). Nonparametric statistics for the social sciences,

95
 (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Snow, D., Rochford, E. B. J., Worden, S. K., & Benford, R. D. (1986). Frame alignment

processes, micromobilization, and movement participation*. American

Sociological Review, 51, 464-481.

Strauss A. & Corbin J. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory

Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

Stromer-Galley, J., & Martey, R. M. (2009). Visual spaces, norm governed places:

The influence of spatial context online. New Media & Society, 11, pp. 1041-1060.

Suddaby, R., & Greenwood, R. (2005). Rhetorical strategies of legitimacy.

Administrative Science Quarterly. 50. pp 35–67.

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and

quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA; Sage.

Thomas, S.B. and Crouse Quinn, S. (2000). Light on the Shadow of the Syphilis Study at

Tuskegee. Health Promotion Practice. (1), pp. 234-237.

Tankard, J. W. (2001). The empirical approach to the study of media framing . In

S. D. Reese, O. H. Gandy & A. E. Grant (Eds.), Framing public life: Perspectives

on media and our understanding of the social world (illustrated ed., pp. 95-105)

Taylor & Francis.

Tuchman, G. (1978). News as a constructed reality. Making news: A study in the

construction of reality. pp. 182-197. New York: The Free Press.

Trumbo, J. (2000) Essay: Seeing Science: Research Opportunities in the Visual

Communication of Science. Science Communication, 21, pp. 379-391.

96
Tufte, E. R. (2006). Beautiful evidence. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.

Ungar, S. (2008). Global Bird Flu Communication: Hot Crisis and Media Reassurance.

Science Communication. 29(4), pp. 472-497.

Warrens, M. J. (2010). Inequalities between multi-rater kappas. Advances in Data

Analysis and Classification.

Wallsten, K. (2010).“Yes We Can”: How Online Viewership, Blog Discussion,

Campaign Statements, and Mainstream Media Coverage Produced a Viral Video

Phenomenon. Journal of Information Technology & Politics. 7 (2-3).

Wimmer, R. D. & Dominick, J.R. (1997): Mass Media Research: An Introduction.

Belmont, MA: Wadsworth.

Yin, R.K. (2009). Case study research: design and methods. Applied social research

methods series. 5(4). Sage.

Zillmann, D., Chen, L., Knobloch, S., & Callison, C. (2004). Effects of lead framing on

selective exposure to internet news reports. Communication Research,

31, pp. 58-81.

97
 APPENDIX A

COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF SOURCES

Source Key Event Date Total

2/16 3/29 4/22 5/12 6/21 7/21
Adam Curtis 1 1 2
Alan Ball 24 24
Alok Jha 7 7
Amazon 3 1 1 5
Arizona State 2 2
Barack Obama 1 1
Bobbette Lacks 1 1
Catlin Gabel 1 1
CBS Sunday Morning 1 1
Chico State 1 1
Columbia University 1 1
David Kroll 1 1
David Prete 4 1 5
Dawn Littleton (Dr.) 1 1
Deborah Cameron/ABC
1 1
Sydney (radio show)
Deborah Lacks 1 1 2
Dr. Amy Harmon (Dr.) 1 1
Dwight Garner 1 1
Eddie Greene (Dr.) 1 1
Floyd Skloot 1 1
Frankenstein 1 1
Franklin Roosevelt 1 1
Fried Green Tomatoes 1 1
Fritzi Bodenheimer 5 5
Gail Javitt 2 2

98
Gary Lacks 1 1
George Gey (Dr.) 2 1 1 4
Hank Greely (J.D.) 1 1
Harald zur Hausen 1 1
Harriet Washington's
1 1
Medical Apartheid
Havasupai Indian Tribe 2 2
HBO Films 19 19
Hurricane (movie) 1 1
Jad Abumrad (Radiolab) 1 1
Jesus Banch, Biologist 1 1
John Moore 1 2 3
Jon Cooper (Dr.) 1 1
Kate Forte 2 2
Kiki Sanford (Dr. Kiki's
1 1
Science Hour)
LA Times 1 1
Lacks Family 1 1
Lee Hartwell (Dr.) 1 1
Lisa Margonelli (Dr.) 1 1
Liz Hunt (UK Telegraph) 3 3
MacMillan 1 1
Maggie Koerth-Baker
1 1
(BoingBoing)
Mayo Clinic 1 1
New York Times 1 1 3 5
Newport News Public
1 1
Library
Nieman Storyboard 1 1
Not Exactly Rocket
1 1
Science
NPR (Fresh Air) 1 1 2
Oprah Winfrey 30 2 32
Peter Macdissi 2 2
Ramtha School of
1 1
Enlightenment

99
Richard Wesley TeLinde
1 1
(Dr.)
Science Journal 1 1
Scienceblogs 1 1
Sir Lord Keenan Kester
1 1
Cofield
Smithsonian Magazine 1 1
Stephen Colbert 1 1 1 3
Steve Ember 5 5
Steven Berlin Johnson 1 1
TED Talks 1 1
The Chicago Tribune 1 1 1
The Independent 1 1
Therese Markow (Dr.) 1 1
U Cal at San Diego 1 1
UIC Urban Allied Health
Academy Spring 2010 1 1
Book Group
Variety 1 1
Vincent Racaniello (Prof) 1 1
Wall Street Journal 1 1 5 7
Washington Post 1 1
Waterhouse 1 1
WHYY’s Radio Times 2 2
Wikipedia 1 1
William Scherer (Dr.) 1 1
Wired Magazine 1 1

Total 22 9 27 84 39 20 201

100
 APPENDIX B

CODING PACKET

101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
 APPENDIX C

AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY

Melissa Shavlik received a Bachelor of Arts degree in Journalism (Advertising

Emphasis) from Creighton University in Omaha, Nebraska. In 2011, she completed her

Master of Science degree in Communication from Portland State University, in Portland,

Oregon. Shavlik is interested in digital media, science communication, design and public

relations.

Correspondence concerning this paper should be addressed to Melissa Shavlik via

email, at [email protected].

141