See my article in the BMJ this week about the shameful performance of three leading local television stations as they failed to cover health policy issues in any meaningful way in the 2004 election year –- on the local, state, or federal level.
I analyzed 10 months or 326 hours of late newscasts on award-winning stations in Seattle, Chicago and Tampa.
KIRO/Seattle had only three stories in ten months, totaling 79 seconds, on any aspect of the George W. Bush or John Kerry health proposals in the 2004 presidential campaign.
WMAQ/Chicago had nine stories, totaling less than four minutes, on presidential candidates’ health plans. WMAQ had almost twice that many stories (16) on low-carb diet stories, including commercial-like promotions for new low-carb products offered by Wendy’s, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Starbucks, and Jack Daniels.
WFLA/Tampa devoted only 84 seconds to Bush-Kerry health platforms in six stories. Serving the senior-heavy Florida Gulf Coast, WFLA managed only three stories in ten months on Medicare, totaling less than 2.5 minutes.
With 40-million-plus Americans uninsured, in 10 months these three award-winning stations reported only one story on the uninsured. It was about an uninsured man with melanoma who won a state lottery.
There are many in this country who now accuse the President of shifting the focus from bad news to better news. I submit that public officials are able to do that only to the extent that journalists let them. And these TV journalists let important health policy issues fall off the radar screen.
Opinions on other issues in news, journals, PR, advertising, marketing
Even when stories get the facts right, they often fail to provide crucial context and caveats that would help audiences make sense of the news — or lack thereof, says @garyschwitzer of @HealthNewsRevu https://t.co/b7YO2fYt0a
Why fact-checking is not enough to prevent the spread of misleading health care news...@HealthNewsRevu https://t.co/fzC2JbDYGV
Simply fact-checking an article "fails to capture questions of nuance and context that arise – or should arise – whenever evaluating medical evidence." https://t.co/HrYkGj12q1
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.
Comments are closed.
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