The U.S. spends more money per capita on health care than any other country. So it is not surprising that there are many commercial interests in the health care industry looking for good publicity from journalists.
The Statement of Principles of the Association of Health Care Journalists states that journalists should:
- Be vigilant in selecting sources, asking about, weighing and disclosing relevant financial, advocacy, personal or other interests of those we interview as a routine part of story research and interviews.
- Investigate and report the possible links between sources of information (studies or experts) and those (such as the manufacturers) who promote a new idea or therapy. Investigate and report the possible links between researchers and private companies, researchers and public institutions, patient advocacy groups and their sponsors, celebrity spokespersons and their sponsors, non-profit health and professional organizations and their sponsors.
Here are several articles on commercialism in news coverage of drugs:
“Bitter Pill,” by Trudy Lieberman, is available at: http://www.cjr.org/issues/2005/4/lieberman.asp.
“Celebrity Selling,” by Ray Moynihan (2 parts), available at: http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/324/7349/1342 and http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/325/7358/286
“Commercialism in TV Health News,” by Gary Schwitzer, is available at: http://www.poynter.org/content/content_view.asp?id=85652
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.
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.