Paper detail

Modeling controversies in the press: the case of the abnormal bees' death

The controversy about the cause(s) of abnormal death of bee colonies in France is investigated through an extensive analysis of the french speaking press. A statistical analysis of textual data is first performed on the lexicon used by journalists to describe the facts and to present associated informations during the period 1998-2010. Three states are identified to explain the phenomenon. The first state asserts a unique cause, the second one focuses on multifactor causes and the third one states the absence of current proof. Assigning each article to one of the three states, we are able to follow the associated opinion dynamics among the journalists over 13 years. Then, we apply the Galam sequential probabilistic model of opinion dynamic to those data. Assuming journalists are either open mind or inflexible about their respective opinions, the results are reproduced precisely provided we account for a series of annual changes in the proportions of respective inflexibles. The results shed a new counter intuitive light on the various pressure supposed to apply on the journalists by either chemical industries or beekeepers and experts or politicians. The obtained dynamics of respective inflexibles shows the possible effect of lobbying, the inertia of the debate and the net advantage gained by the first whistleblowers.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.