1. framing-science
  2. Word to Watch: Big Nanotech

Word to Watch: Big Nanotech

By nisbetmc on July 23, 2007.

Big Tobacco.
Big Oil.
Big Pharma.
Big Biotech.

Big Nanotech?

Each of these phrases are examples of frame devices, words that act like triggers in activating underlying cultural meanings.

In fact, these frame devices instantly communicate the public accountability frame: Who benefits? Who controls the science? Is this science in the public or in the private interest?

As nanotechnology climbs up the media agenda over the next decade, watch out for the "Big Nanotech" frame device. It will be a sign that interpretations of the issue are moving from a promotional emphasis on social progress and economic development to a potentially more controversy-laden emphasis on public accountability.

Tags
Uncategorized

More like this

One-Stop Shopping for the Framing Science Debate

You may be aware that there is a huge discussion about framing science going on in the blogosphere. It has gotten out of hand.

Framing and Expelled: Why the Framers are Mis-Framing

I'm going to jump into the framing wars again. As I mentioned last time, I think that most folks who are "opposed" to framing really don't understand what they're talking about - and I'll once again explain why. But on the other hand,

Framing Science REDUX

Framing 'framing'

As you may have noticed, there is a vigorous debate going on in the blogosphere about framing science (all the links to all the relevant posts can be found if you click on that link).

An intriguing idea, but I'm not sure I agree.

My experience in trying to write about nanotech suggests to me that it is different than the other examples you cite, because it is a means to a variety of ends in a variety of fields. So rather than being a business sector of its own, as each of your examples is, it's a technological tool being adapted by big oil and big pharma etc. to support their business sector.

That's precisely what's made it hard for me to write about nanotech for a general newspaper audience - there's "no there there."

I'm sure you're aware of the FDA's Nanotechnology Task Force?

From the FDA website:

With the advent of nanotechnology, the regulation of many products will involve more than one Center, for example a "drug" delivery "device". In these cases the assignment of regulatory lead is the responsibility of the Office of Combination Products. To facilitate the regulation of nanotechnology products, the Agency has formed a NanoTechnology Interest Group (NTIG), which is made up of representatives from all the Centers.

(Shamelessly snagged from todays Popular Science blog)