This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Graham, M. B. Articles by Lindeman, N. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Rhetoric and Politics of Science in the Case of the Missouri River System

Iowa State University

Neil Lindeman

San Francisco State University

Two versions of a biological opinion written by different teams in the U.S. Fish and Wild-life Service illuminate how different rhetorical strategies reflect different values. The historical narrative in the earlier biological opinion, which is used to argue for vigorous action to protect endangered species along the Missouri River, is largely erased in the later opinion that privileges human uses of the river system. This analysis emphasizes the problematic nature of authorship when the concept is applied to a document produced in an organization or agency. Moreover, examining how authors control information reveals the power technical writers have to influence meaning making.

Key Words: narrative • controlling information • authorship • public policy • Missouri River

Journal of Business and Technical Communication, Vol. 19, No. 4, 422-448 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/1050651905278311


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. B. Graham Disciplinary Practice(s) in Business Communication, 1985 to 2004 Journal of Business Communication, July 1, 2006; 43(3): 268 - 277. [PDF]