Personal tools
Jump to: navigation, search

This study aims to answer the question “How do the Philippine Star and the Philippine Daily Inquirer articles report reproductive health (RH) bill issues from January 2008 to December 2010?” through establishing coverage, determining slant, comparing coverage, and identifying recurring frames of focus in their coverage. With a closer look at the reports, debates, and also some studies regarding health journalism, there seems to be a lack of information about the more substantial issues regarding reproductive health. With the knowledge of Agenda-Setting Theory and Framing Analysis , the researchers treat the articles as a product of careful deliberation by broadsheet reporters, editors, and managers. Therefore, the slant and focus of the articles might, approximately, be a product of their editorial discretion. Through content analysis, the researchers found out that both broadsheets focused their reporting mainly on clashing views between the two institutions (church and state). Very few articles discussed the facts and more vital points about the health effects of family planning methods which might have been more important in giving the citizenry a chance for a more informed choice regarding reproductive health.

Amores, A. and Capistrano, J.(2012).Pills Be With You:A Comparative Content Analysis of the Coverage of Reproductive Health Bill Issues by the Philippine Daily Inquirer and the Philippine Star from 2008-2010. Unpublished undergraduate thesis. University of the Philippines Diliman, College of Mass Communication.

Keywords: RH Bill, reproductive health, content analysis, family planning, health, PDI, PhilStar

View thesis

  • This page was last modified on 28 March 2012, at 23:22.
  • This page has been accessed 2,764 times.
The Fine Print: contents on this site are owned by whoever posted them (as indicated on the page History). Neither the DILC nor the University is responsible for them in any way. DILC reserves the right to delete them if they are deemed in violation of the University's Acceptable Use Policy and other applicable laws.