A Comparative Analysis of Health News in Indigenous and Mainstream Media.

ABSTRACT

It is important to evaluate the media's health coverage of Indigenous communities both because these communities have been hit very hard by health inequities, and because misinformation can negatively affect the future health of Indian Country. This study takes the unique angle of examining both Indigenous and non-Indigenous ("mainstream") news publications to evaluate information gaps in health, health policy, and health efficacy coverage. The Indigenous media examined, which covered 14 times more health stories than mainstream media, highlighted health issues in Indian Country through the lens of resilience by using framing to emphasize unequal power, while at the same time providing depth and specificity. Instead of putting Indigenous health stories into historical and cultural context, mainstream media focused on the lack of resources and the chronic struggle of Indigenous communities. Mainstream media often only covered the topic once per outlet; however, those outlets with connections to Indigenous communities did provide more balanced coverage. Instead of promoting change, most mainstream media stories blamed Indigenous people for their situation and offered a doom trajectory for tribes hit hardest by health disparities. This study reveals how embedded framing and mediatization direct non-Native readers' attention away from the systemic deprivation of support to U.S. Indigenous tribes that was guaranteed to them by the U.S. government in tribal agreements. The implications for journalism and policy are discussed.