During food safety crises, news media and governments play key roles in disseminating risk information. By adopting the methodology of discourse analysis, this study examines how four major newspapers in Taiwan and the Taiwan Food and Drug Administration (TFDA) constructed and communicated health risks during two food safety crises involving starch and cooking oil. This study found that experts quoted in news coverage emphasized long-term risks, whereas government officials highlighted immediate risks. In addition, experts used metaphors and provided examples to illustrate the risks, whereas government officials based their risk discourse on laws. These contrasting approaches might be due to the differences in the perspectives on risk assessment or the differences in the nature of news reports and government press releases. When comparing risk discourse in news coverage to the TFDA’s press releases, much common ground can be found; however, this study discovered that the latter included more expressions indicating uncertainty. Experts’ “high risk” language and officials’ legal discourse might not sufficiently assist the public in responding to food safety issues.