Another fine example of what local television news can do with complex health topics when serious reporters are given time to pursue stories in-depth.
Jeff Baillon of KMSP-TV (a former health journalism graduate student of mine) reported on the conflicting opinions breast cancer patients are given about followup testing. It’s an important story of evidence-based medicine and of shared decision-making. He demonstrated the confusing, conflicting world that many can be thrown into.
One small but, I think, significant piece of constructive criticism I give Baillon is that he may have confused viewers by using the term “screening” to refer to followup testing of women with breast cancer. Screening should be used to describe testing that’s done on people of unknown risk. I often say that screening is like going into a baseball stadium packed with 40,000 people of unknown risk and then testing to see if you find any problems. But this was a story about followup testing of women who had already received diagnoses and treatment.
That critique should not override my congratulations to Baillon and KMSP-TV for reporting the kind of story one rarely sees on local TV news.
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