Gary Schwitzer is publisher and founder of HealthNewsReview.org. He has worked in health care journalism for more than 40 years and has taught media ethics and health care journalism at the University of Minnesota. He tweets as @garyschwitzer or using our project handle, @HealthNewsRevu.
In the past two days, we’ve outlined a number of concerns about news organizations, professional journalism organizations and academic institutions that are involved in health care journalism reporting or training while accepting sponsorship or funding from health care industry entities that are often subjects of what the journalists or trainees do or will write about. (Part one of series. Part two.) These practices may be good for corporate, organizational or academic institution coffers, but the sponsorship comes at a price – of potential damage to journalism’s integrity and to the public trust in journalism, news reports and news organizations.
We have touched on examples of our concerns involving:
Ben Bagdikian, journalist/educator/media critic, wrote to and about journalists:
“Never forget that your obligation is to the people. It is not, at heart, to those who pay you, or to your editor, or to your sources, or to your friends, or to the advancement of your career. It is to the public.”
In this final part of our three-part series, I talk about some of these issues in more depth, and from the perspective of my growing concerns over a 44-year career in health care journalism.
President Donald Trump, in a recent commencement address at Liberty University, claimed: “Nothing is easier or more pathetic than being a critic.” I couldn’t disagree more. It is not easy to offer carefully thought-out, constructive criticism to people whose work you usually admire and respect as I admire and respect many of the people whose organizational policies we have criticized in this series. In response to the President’s “pathetic” comment, I’ll simply counter with a few favorite quotes:
“Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.” – Winston Churchill
“The trouble with most of us is that we would rather be ruined by praise than saved by criticism.” – Norman Vincent Peale, minister, author
“Writers shouldn’t fear criticism. Instead, they should fear silence. Criticism is healthy. It gets people thinking about your work and, even better, it gets them talking and arguing. But as for silence — it is the greatest killer of writers.”- Author Robert Fanney.
We invite a healthy discussion about some of the current trends of more news organizations accepting industry support from the industries they write about every day. Because, as Churchill described, we think it is an “unhealthy state of things.”
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