Fwd: RED FLAGS FROM REDFLAGSDAILY.COM, OCTOBER 20, 2003

[Guest guest]

Mon, 20 Oct 2003 10:29:05 -0700

RED FLAGS FROM REDFLAGSDAILY.COM, OCTOBER 20, 2003

 

" Nicholas Regush "

 

 

MONDAY, OCTOBER 20, 2003

 

http://www.redflagsdaily.com

 

FLASH! NEWS

 

JUST ONE CLICK TO THE SPECIAL EXTRA! PAGE

 

 

 

RED FLAGS

 

MEDIA " RISK " REPORTING

 

Many of the people who visit RFD are annoyed or infuriated by mainstream media

health reports, for one reason or another. A common complaint is that reporters

who often are in over their heads on an issue tend to lend more of an ear to

well-established researchers (particularly those who work at major health

institutions) than to those scientists and consumer advocates who adopt a more

appraising view of a public health issue.

 

This unfortunate reporting tendency is likely to become even more enshrined in

media coverage. Today’s story in THE GUARDIAN about people being " scared silly "

is a major red flag and suggests that " risk " will become even more of a

mainstream-defined concept, serving the interests of those who have pegged their

careers to the fortunes of drug companies and other medical industries.

 

We learn, for example, that the BBC is " preparing guidelines for journalists on

reporting stories involving risk to help editors ensure that scare stories are

kept in perspective. "

 

Indeed. And who will make those decisions as to what constitutes a scare story?

Are reporters going to do detailed research on issues that have thus far been

badly neglected? Or are they going to do as they usually do — mimic those whom

they perceive are in positions of authority and behave as though science is

something they own, rather than something they might consider pursuing more

diligently and with an open mind?

 

Now, get this: " The initiative comes as a King’s Fund report…shows that

Britain’s main killers — smoking, alcohol abuse, obesity and mental illness —

are statistically under-reported. Lesser risks (emphasis mine) — such as the MMR

vaccine, vCJD, AIDS… -

 

command column inches and airtime in excess of the danger they present. "

 

In more than 25 years of journalism, I have never come across a statement so

utterly stupid and self-serving as the one above. If the BBC goes ahead with its

guidelines, then GONG to the BBC.

 

But it’s only a matter of time, however, before the U.S. networks codify their

already narrow, pro-Establishment understanding of risk. After ten years at ABC

News, I can tell you that very few people at that network are qualified to

report on health risk. It’s quite amazing when some half-decent research

actually gets done on a health story.

 

-Nicholas Regush

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NEW WEB MESSAGE BOARDS - JOIN HERE.

Alternative Medicine Message Boards.Info

http://alternative-medicine-message-boards.info

 

 

 

The New with improved product search