Hold the champagne, please.
Jubilant headlines that borrow framing from a World Health Organization (WHO) announcement are declaring the Americas a “measles-free” zone.
NBC: Measles Has Been Eliminated in the Americas, WHO Says
Newsweek: Measles eradicated from the Americas
The Atlantic: The Measles-Free Americas
TIME: The Americas Are Now Officially Free of Measles
“We celebrate this historic day in which the scourge has been eliminated,” said Carissa Etienne, director of the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), quoted in the NBC piece and many others.
The scourge of measles is still with us and media messages should reflect that reality
This reminds me of why you shouldn’t start your end zone dance when you’re still on the 10-yard line.
Many of these stories about the announcement go on to clarify that no, the Americas aren’t in fact “measles-free” because new cases can and are brought in from abroad on a regular basis, which can and does lead to new outbreaks — including those at Disneyland in 2015 and in Arizona this year.
But if that’s the case, why are headlines blaring a message about measles elimination that can easily be misinterpreted by the public?
Misleading messages can be exploited by the anti-vaccination movement
It’s amazing that we have a vaccine for this highly contagious virus. According to the CDC:
Recent outbreaks in the U.S. originating from abroad have occurred in communities with low vaccination rates. And that’s the main reason why Arthur Caplan, PhD, Director of the Division of Medical Ethics at New York University, thinks the recent news coverage was generally “very disappointing.”
“Antivaxxers are constantly looking for reasons not to vaccinate and to convince others not to do so,” he told me. “Telling them in screaming headlines that measles is eradicated, the equivalent of yelling that like smallpox, measles is gone from this country, is confusing, not true and dangerous. This story demands nuance — native strains seem to be eradicated. Strains outside the USA are still a threat since they can and are brought into the country both by visitors and by American tourists, foreign aid workers and biz travelers who bring measles back.”
Some stories did a better job of covering a complicated issue
A few of the headlines that I saw — and there may have been others that I didn’t see — did reflect the nuance that Caplan was looking for to varying degrees:
Forbes: Important Difference: Measles Elimination In Americas Does Not Mean Eradication Or Extinction
LiveScience: Measles Eliminated from the Americas: Here’s Why There Will Still be Cases
Popular Science: THE AMERICAS JUST ELIMINATED MEASLES, BUT VACCINATION WILL HELP IT STAY GONE
But it wasn’t enough, in my opinion, to counter the misleading impression that the majority of headlines will surely leave with readers.
Words matter, especially in headlines.
It’s not good enough to clarify a confusing headline in the ninth paragraph of the body text, as at least one story about the announcement did.
Comments (2)
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
John Galbraith Simmons
October 3, 2016 at 7:14 amQuite right to point to the problematic in this old aspiration recycled as news. Health journalists should learn to consider the eradication peg a durable PR myth to be avoided.
Tom Prvulovic
October 4, 2016 at 11:23 amWHO did it again: they have celebrated Liberia Ebola free only to face more cases in all 3 West Africsn countries. Both late Dr. Jonathan Mann ( discoverer of Ebola. and my boss) and Dr. Peter Piott (co discoverer of Ebola and my boss) said that you can. Celebrate only when you find the last case in the most remote village and resolve it. All of us who had experience with Ebola agree. WHO also stated before Rio that we do not have to worry about Zika at all and now we have Zika in Africa and Asia. Seems that they like celebrating rather than use opinion of real experts working with them but not daring to contradict their Directors. I am sorry to say, but we will have measles particularly in view of unfortunate ‘ movement’ by some careless parents to avoid vaccinating their kids.
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