Jessie Gruman, Ph.D., of the Center for the Advancement of Health, offers a column on the dangers of television health news and information. Excerpt:
“In Oklahoma City, a popular new local television program based on the ABC network’s “Extreme Makeover” takes women eager for a new look and sets them up with plastic surgeons, Lasik practitioners and cosmetic dentists.
In Baltimore, a local news program airs community service features about new developments in pediatric care and women’s health.
In Washington, D.C., a station gravely reports on the prognosis for Peter Jennings (who airs on a competing channel) and then suggests free CT lung scans at a local hospital for long-time smokers.
What is wrong here?
In the first instance, the makeover artists are licensed health care practitioners and a university medical center paying for the “right” to inflict medically unnecessary and risky cosmetic surgery. In the second instance, two large hospitals — one a university medical center — are buying time on the newscast with the hope of luring high-paying or well insured patients to boost the bottom line in a competitive market. In the third case, viewers are not told that the free lung scans are part of an international clinical trial that by its very nature entails some measure of risk.
It would seem there is another health risk at work here — the local broadcast news media.”
Opinions on other issues in news, journals, PR, advertising, marketing
Puleeeeease... this 'game changer' weight loss drug causes more nausea and vomiting than a placebo. Some game, some change. My friend Gary would spank you for using the eighth word medical reporters should never, ever use. @garyschwitzer @thackerpd
https://www.healthnewsreview.org/toolkit/just-journalists-writing-tips-case-studies/7-words-and-more-you-shouldnt-use-in-medical-news/ https://twitter.com/OttawaCitizen/status/1361426796126830597
A scary @statnews Op-Ed warns that govt attempts to rein in Pharma may cut off access to "life-changing" drugs.
It takes @garyschwitzer to let us know: the author spent 10 years as Pfizer's public-policy chief. https://twitter.com/garyschwitzer/status/1360325022578053123
.@TranspariMED criticizes STAT op-ed for not disclosing pharma funding of author’s institute - similar to criticism we’ve made of STAT op-eds in the past. @transparify @ThinkTankWatch @icer_review https://www.healthnewsreview.org/2021/02/transparency-watchdog-criticizes-stats-non-disclosure-on-pro-pharma-op-ed/
Comments
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
Health
May 13, 2005 at 12:12 pmI find local news as a useless device for tabloidish stories disguised as news.
I used to work for 2 local stations in San Diego, and we’d always have sponsored segments about health and medicine. This was over 10 years ago, so the practice is nothing new.
Unfortunately, local news is doing very little for the community it serves. Yes, occasionally we’ll get a good piece of investigative journalism, but usually it is just prompter readers regurgitating wire stories.
I find local news promos, though, to be very entertaining:
“You’re going to die now! But we’ve got the cure! Tonight at 11!”
If it’s so important, and you care so much about the community, why not tell me now?
Roxanne
May 14, 2005 at 9:30 pmI can’t bear to watch television news. It is just so…so…dumbed down and sensationalized. Especially when it comes to health. Having worked on the “other side” of healthcare, ie, as a nurse in a hospital before escaping to journalism, the reporting on TV is more reminiscent of a hospital-style television show, rather than reality. Dr. Kildare, anyone, to save the day?
Our Comments Policy
But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.
You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.
This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.
We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.
There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”
The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:
We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.
And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.
The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.
You might also like