An article on Salon, ” ‘I wish I had breast cancer’: The latest terrible cancer campaign,” criticizes the Pancreatic Cancer Action organization for its latest “awareness” campaign.
In it, a man says “I wish I had testicular cancer” and a woman says “I wish I had breast cancer.”
The author of the Salon piece writes:
“Cancer is not a competition. It is not a contest to see who has the best or worst experience. … Can we please just stop this stuff? … You can advocate for early detection and increased awareness without crapping all over other people who are going through their own experiences. …And remember that if you’re trying to win the “My cancer is worse than your cancer” award, you’re in a really dumb race.”
On Twitter, breast cancer advocates agree with the article, with critics calling the campaign “offensive, distasteful, awful, horrendous” and much more.
Jody Schoger wrote: “The ‘my cancer is bigger than yours’ campaign is straight out of second grade. Do better, people.”
Laura Nikolaides wrote: “Byproduct of misguided pink ribbon campaigns.”
See more about what the Daily Mail calls “outrage” about the campaign.
The cacophony of media messages about “disease awareness” just got a lot louder.
Addendum: Don’t miss Katherine O’Brien’s piece on the IHateBreastCancer blog, in which she says the “brilliant marketing plan is working.” Excerpt:
Perhaps most troubling is the notion of what the American Cancer Society’s Otis Brawley calls “disease Olympics,” i.e., when advocates for one disease try to increase funding for their disease by decreasing funding for another disease. “I believe the wise advocate tries to get more money for all cancer research and does not try to undermine another disease in favor of the disease that he or she is interested in,” says Brawley.
——————-
Follow us on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/garyschwitzer
https://twitter.com/healthnewsrevu
Opinions on other issues in news, journals, PR, advertising, marketing
Major revisions + reversals of reporting about the efficacy of remdesivir and HCQ have compromised the public's trust in scientists and physicians. Complexity and caution are key to public #COVID19 communications @garyschwitzer https://ja.ma/3fzUW0M
SPH adjunct associate professor @garyschwitzer presented to @Georgetown University public health students on how #covid19 has been "the perfect storm of politics, PR, and polluted messages to the public."
Watch the recorded zoom presentation here: https://www.healthnewsreview.org/2020/09/perfect-storm-of-politics-pr-polluted-messages-to-the-public/.
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