Chemicals that are widely used in consumer products offer challenges to product manufacturers, risk managers, environmental regulators, environmental scientists, and the interested public. However, the factors that cause specific chemicals to rise to the level of regulatory, scientific, and social movement concern and scrutiny are not well documented, and scientists are frequently unclear about exactly how their research impacts policy. Through a case study of advocacy around flame retardant chemicals, this paper traces the pathways through which scientific evidence and concern is marshaled by both advocacy groups and media sources to affect policy change. We focus our analysis around a broad coalition of environmental and public health advocacy organizations and an investigative journalism series published in 2012 in the Chicago Tribune. We demonstrate that the Tribune series both brought the issue to a wider public audience and precipitated government action, including state policy revisions and federal Senate hearings. We also show how a broad and successful flame retardant coalition developed, leveraged a media event, and influenced policy at multiple institutional levels. The analysis draws on over 110 in-depth interviews, literature and Web site reviews, and observations at a flame retardant manufacturing company, government offices, and scientific and advocacy conferences.