Here’s proof that local TV news can do a meaty job on a meaningful health policy issue. At a time when more local TV news becomes light, fluffy, “news you can use” that you really can’t use, this effort is a refreshing and important use of airtime.
Jeff Baillon of Fox-9 TV news in Minneapolis-St. Paul put together a piece on US Senator Amy Klobuchar’s (D-Minn.) support for “The EARLY Act,” which Baillon reports, “would spend $9 million a year over five years on an educational campaign that would, among other things, encourage women as young as 15 years old to perform regular breast self exams in the hopes of catching the disease early.”
But rather than go with the flow of what appears to be a noble cause, Baillon reported that there’s no scientific evidence that screening young women in their teens and 20s does any good, and that it could actually do some harm.
MinnPost.com has also recently reported on the controversy surrounding the legislation.
I am not aware that the “big 3” of Minnesota news organizations – the Star Tribune, the Pioneer Press, or Minnesota Public Radio – have even touched the controversy. I will happily issue a correction if I simply missed anything they have done on the matter.
I know that two of the interviews Baillon used in this piece were captured when he attended a journalist workshop hosted by the National Institutes of Health last month. He paid his own way there. But he wanted to learn more about how to scrutinize claims in health care. This piece is good evidence of what he’s learned. (Disclosure: Baillon was a student in my graduate health journalism seminar in Fall 2008. He got an A.)
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.
Gregory Dennis
July 13, 2009 at 4:05 pmGood for Baillon to dig into this. But he got it wrong. There are plenty of benefits to educating young adult women about breast cancer risk. And there’s a lot to like about the EARLY Act.
Nancy Brinker, founder of the Susan G. Komen Foundation, explains why in a new piece in Roll Call, at http://www.rollcall.com/news/36687-1.html.
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