| Abstract: | Liberation therapy has received significant attention in Canadian media as a controversial
new surgical treatment for multiple sclerosis (MS). The wavering stance of the Canadian
Institute of Health Research to fund clinical trials informed contentious media representations
rooted in scientific expertise versus patient advocacy and hope. This research supports the
finding of preceding media studies in scientific controversies that the conflict was defined by: a)
A balance ethic giving equal weight to competing stakeholders, b) Socially constituted moral
issues were dominated by a patient injustice frame, and c) A strong emphasis placed on
stakeholders made up of patients or affected individuals to dominate the media framing and
discourse. Through an in-depth case study informed by the sociology of scientific knowledge,
this research argues that not only did the moral amplification of the patient injustice frame give
salience to certain facts over others, but it also contributed to the social determination of research
priorities. |