|
Archives | (December 2001)
Printer Friendly
Media Malpractice (cont.)
------------------------------------------------------------------ Page 4 of 4 But why is there such a marked difference between the way stories on conventional medicine are reported, and the way non-traditional therapies are covered? The answer is simple: money. Because of recent relaxation of restrictions on product advertising, pharmaceutical companies have become among the nation's largest advertisers. You can hardly watch a television broadcast or pick up a magazine without encountering an ad for some new "miracle" product. It should come as no surprise that when billions of dollars are on the table, it is all too easy for journalistic standards to be compromised. For example, a recent cover of in U.S. News and World Reports ominously warned about the dangers of dietary supplements. The article the cover highlights is a call for greater Federal regulation -- something most observers agree will greatly curtail, if not destroy the dietary supplement industry. But that's not all the magazine contained. Inside the issue was a four-page ad from Pfizer Pharmaceuticals, one of the world's largest drug companies. Similarly, MSNBC's website features an article in its health section urging people to participate in a cancer drug trial using celecoxib. Celecoxib is the generic name for the painkiller Celebrex, a drug heavily advertised on NBC. Both U.S. News and World Reports and NBC would undoubtedly argue that advertisers did not influence their coverage, the proof is in the content. While the U.S. News and World Reports warned ominously about such potential threats as drug interactions between herbal products and pharmaceutical drugs, it failed to mention that over 100,000 people a year die from adverse reactions to prescription drugs taken in as instructed! While the MSNBC report extolled the virtues of the celecoxib trial, it also claimed that the drug was less likely to cause bleeding than aspirin -- a statement that is flatly untrue! It would seem that profits were more important than journalistic ethics! At first glance, the media bias against non-traditional medicine might seem an insoluble problem. But there is a way to address it: public pressure. It is true that media outlets are responsive to their advertisers, but they are even more responsive to a vocal public Letters, phone calls and visits work! So the next time you see an example of slanted, inaccurate coverage write a letter to the editor or call the reporter! You will be amazed at how effective you can be. |
|
