Cheshire William P
Mayo Clinic, USA.
Am J Bioeth. 2004 Winter;4(1):1-5. doi: 10.1162/152651604773067172.
In bioethics as in the sciences, enormous discussions often concern the very small. Central to public debate over emerging reproductive and regenerative biotechnologies is the question of the moral status of the human embryo. Because news media have played a prominent role in framing the vocabulary of the debate, this study surveyed the use of language reporting on human embryo research in news articles spanning a two-year period. Terminology that devalued moral status-for example, the descriptors things, property, tissue, or experimental material -was found to outnumber fivefold those that affirmed any degree of moral status above that of inanimate cellular matter; for example, living, human life, or human being. A quarter of the articles failed to note that the embryos under discussion were human. These findings confirm that even among scientific and philosophical experts a diversity of opinion exists on society's moral obligations to nascent human life. The skewed linguistic distribution also indicates a distinct bias. Concerned readers should take notice when any category of humanity becomes subject to prejudicial and disparaging language and the value of vulnerable human life is trivialized alongside sensational assertions of anticipated medical cures. The responsibility for holding the media to a higher standard of truth and fairness falls to us all.
在生物伦理学领域，就如同在科学领域一样，大量的讨论往往聚焦于非常微小的事物。围绕新兴生殖和再生生物技术展开的公众辩论的核心问题是人类胚胎的道德地位。由于新闻媒体在构建这场辩论的词汇方面发挥了突出作用，本研究调查了在为期两年的新闻报道中有关人类胚胎研究的语言使用情况。研究发现，贬低道德地位的术语——例如，用“事物”“财产”“组织”或“实验材料”等描述词——的出现频率是那些肯定胚胎具有高于无生命细胞物质道德地位的术语（例如“有生命的”“人类生命”或“人”）的五倍。四分之一的文章没有提及所讨论的胚胎是人类的。这些发现证实，即使在科学和哲学专家中，对于社会对新出现的人类生命的道德义务也存在多种观点。这种语言分布的偏差也表明了一种明显的偏见。当任何人类群体受到带有偏见和诋毁性的语言对待，以及脆弱的人类生命的价值与对预期医疗治愈效果的耸人听闻的断言一起被轻视时，关注此事的读者应该予以留意。让媒体达到更高的真实和公平标准是我们所有人的责任。
