With the successful cloning of animals, many people have reacted with frightening and usually uninformed ideas about what cloning is and what researchers hope to achieve through it. Many wish to ban all cloning without even looking at the positive things that cloning will be able to provide for us in the future and with continued research. Like any new technology, people are at first afraid, but this is no excuse to abandon research that could one day save millions of people through cloned organs or give an alternative and safe means of reproduction to sterile couples. This fear has only been furthered by the media sensationalizing the advancement and tossing “Brave New World” into every headline. The uninformed also look to popular culture instead of facts to argue against cloning. Jurassic Park, Frankenstein and The Island of Doctor Moreau have shown to the majority of American the dark, evil side of cloning, which is not the aim of scientists and at present not technologically possible. It is obvious that we must act now and set guidelines, both ethical and legislative, but we should not ban cloning completely without further research.
The picture of an amazingly rich person cloning the perfect army of soldiers or breeding a nation of subservient clones has been fed to the people through newspapers and the nightly news. What most people do not realize is that clones are not grown in a petri dish. Clones still have to be protected in a womb for nine months and be born, just like any other person. It would be far easier for an ultra rich man to produce an army or a group of slaves “the old fashion way.” As a society and as humans, we should worry about the slavery and despotism that already …
… middle of paper …
…e fears.” CNNfn. 1997. http://www.cnnfn.com/hotstories/bizbuzz/wires/9702/25/cloning_wg/ (28 Feb. 1997)
Glassman, James. “Should We Fear Dolly?” The Washington Post. 1997. http://washingtonpost.com:80/wp-srv/WPlate/1997-02/25/012L-022597-idx.html (28 Feb. 1997)
Darrow, Siobhan. “Should we be cloning around?” CNN Interactive. 1997. (28 Feb. 1997)
Scheinin, Richard. “Religion grapples with man-as-creator.” Mercury Center. 1997. (28 Feb. 1997)
Coghlan, Andy. “One small step for a sheep.” New Scientist. 1997. http://www.newscientist.com/clone/smallstep.html (28 Feb. 1997)
Concar, David. “The point of no return.” New Scientist. 1997. http://www.newscientist.com/clone/comment.html ( 28 Feb. 1997)
Coghlan, David and Andy Concar. “How the clock of life was turned back.” New Scientist. 1997. http://www.newscientist.com/clone/comment.html (28 Feb. 1997)
Representation of Cloning in the Media
Representation of Cloning in the Media
Since the birth of Dolly, the cloned sheep, the debate over human cloning has been characterized in the media as an ethical debate. When scientists announced that they had cloned an adult sheep, the public also heard that cloning humans was possible. The media stories about this unprecedented feat was not about the procedures utilized in but rather about the morality of the process itself. Media coverage focused on ethical concerns of cloning, its social, religious and physiological significance, and the motivation behind it. Although the there are many views expressed in the media on cloning, the main characterization of cloning as an ethical issue centers around two connected worries: the loss of individuality, and the seemingly evil motivations behind cloning. In a sense media coverage framed the public moral debate on cloning around the above issues.
In the coverage of cloning, the media has chosen to represent cloning as a danger to individuality and uniqueness. This concern about losing individuality stems from the status of clones as copies. The March 10, 1997 cover of Time Magazine shows two large identical pictures of sheep and in the background numerous copies of the same picture and the cover title asks, “Will There be Another of You ?”. The picture accompanying the main article shows a coin operated machine dispensing white males, while another picture shows identical bodies dropping out of a test tube. Similar images expressing this concern over the loss of individuality brought on by cloning dominate the popular media.
This representation of cloning as a means of bringing about the loss of individuality reflects two widespread ideas. The first is…
… middle of paper …
…w, the media has framed the cloning debate as an ethical debate and has provided the framework that much of the public views the issue. Among the articles that I reviewed, the main characterization of cloning as an ethical issue centers around two connected worries: the loss of individuality, the motivations behind cloning. In the presentation cloning the media has not always presented an objective view of cloning, but rather has played upon peoples fears about loss of individuality and questionable use of cloning to create uncertainty among the public.
Works Cited
Begley, Sharon, Little Lamb Who Made Thee, Newsweek, March 10, 1997
Elmer Dewitt, Cloning: Where Do We Draw the Line, Time, November 8, 1993
Herbert, Wray, The World After Cloning U.S News