Some months I can’t wait for my new issue of Prevention magazine to arrive, just so I can see how they’ve stretched the envelope this time.
How about this month’s cover, trumpeting a Cancer Vaccine Breakthrough in big yellow font at lower left of the cover?
So I started flipping through the Table of Contents for the big story. Hmmm….nothing there. Odd.
So I started flipping through the pages of tips for “jiggle-proof arms and abs” and such and….voila…on page 13 I found the big story under another “Cancer Breakthrough” heading.
In 16 words in that little box, I learned that a vaccine was “moving into the testing phase.”
Usually, reasonable people would wait until we’ve moved out of the testing phase before declaring something a breakthrough.
But, hey, the cover worked like a publisher’s dream. It sucked me in. Hiding the 16-word meat of the story away from the Table of Contents sucked me in even further, forcing me to scan the ads and the features that read like ads.
Years ago, patients urged me to write my column entitled, “The 7 Words You Shouldn’t Use in Medical News.”
Breakthrough was one of them. This is the kind of story they had in mind.
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 (4)
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
Dan Rutz
December 9, 2011 at 10:22 amImpact should another, Gary. It’s especially overused in public health discussion. You had me nervous for a minute…thought you might be coming down on HPV or HBV vaccines. Both approach the “B word” for populations who’ve embraced them. We have a ways to go with the former in this country, and across much of Asia with the latter.
Gary Schwitzer
December 13, 2011 at 8:42 amFYI to readers: Paul Raeburn of the Knight Science Journalism Tracker thinks I let Prevention magazine off easy. Read his post:
http://ksjtracker.mit.edu/2011/12/12/prevention-magazine-a-breakthrough-in-bad-cover-language/
Gary Schwitzer
December 13, 2011 at 8:42 amFYI to readers: Paul Raeburn of the Knight Science Journalism Tracker thinks I let Prevention magazine off easy. Read his post:
http://ksjtracker.mit.edu/2011/12/12/prevention-magazine-a-breakthrough-in-bad-cover-language/
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