What ever happened to the killer bees that were supposed to kill us all? Or the Asian bird flu that seemed to be assassinating the unvaccinated masses? They disappeared, faded into the background as the next big virus or potentially deadly disease fueled the ugliest part of modern journalism: fear driven journalism.
This is the topic presented by journalist Leonard Pitts, of The Sacramento Bee, in an article posted last Saturday. Pitts specifically targets the latest epidemic in our “United States of Fear,” that being the “superbug,” or Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus: a staph infection.
For no apparent reason, all interest has been turned to a strain of the staph infection that does not respond to common antibiotics. In the first two weeks of October, U.S. newspapers mentioned the virus 155 times. As soon as it caught the attention of the readers, specifically from the 15th to the 31st, the “superbug” was mentioned over 1,650 times.
“So did staph somehow become deadlier in the last two weeks than it was before? No,” writes Pitts. "Staph is not new," says Nicole Coffin, a spokeswoman for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta. "Even MRSA is not new. In the hospitals it's been around for 30 years. In the general population, it's been around for at least 10 years."”
Pitts finishes his article by saying in no way is he trying to make light of staph infections themselves. He is, however, trying to show some light on the “journalists” that bring us, “shark attacks! Poison gases in your home! Bacteria lurking in hotel sheets! The pedophile next door!” and ridicule them for work that causes more collective worry than life saving awareness.
I could not agree more with Mr. Pitts opinions on fear driven news. I think it is an easy way to turn out an article that will do nothing, but prey upon the “fight or flight” instinct in all humans. Furthermore, when looking at the SPJ Code of Ethics, I think it directly violates the principle of a journalists attempt to “Minimize Harm.” These headlines of “Superbug kills another” and “Superbug can’t be stopped” only inflame present situations and corrupt the mentality of the masses to a point of absolute, and unnecessary, panic.
The code says that journalists should, “Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiousity,” and under the heading “Seek Truth and Report It,” journalists should, “not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.” As Pitts reported, this form of staph infection has been around for at least 10 years, it is nothing new.
If the news could focus on dispersing helpful information instead of hyping the latest ailment, maybe society as a whole could share in a moment of calm instead of waiting for a dooms day that never comes.
http://www.sacbee.com/110/story/469042.html
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
I agree with this Ethics Blog. Fear seems to be taking over our society. As a country we fear the threat of terrorism. We fear that our troops will not come home safe from the war in Iraq. Americans fear for their children on an everyday basis. We fear that we will not make enough money to support ourselves or our families. With our everday struggles and fears, why would journalists choose to be over dramamtic about an infection that has been around for years. Why would a journalist choose to be overdramatic about a situation that does not propose a threat to a mass population of people. According to the code of ethics, "journalists should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context." Writing an article that makes staph seem like the next deadliest infection is unethical.
I too, agree with the Ethics Blog. The media uses fear to shock and scare us. The world can be a scary place. Yet, the world is filled with positive attributes as well. Perhaps, the news could focus more on the facts and less on installing fear in its readers.
One of the most important jobs of the media is to inform the genreral public. This job however at times is taken too far and rather than simply inform the media, reporters and analysts tend to create circumstances that are extreme or sensationalized. In this case the topic of discussion is the over reporting of diseases and ailments around the world. Reporters, by doing this, hope to gain a following of readers by appealing to the fear that everyone lives with. It is not entirely ethical to write stories and report the news with sole intent of scaring your reader into coming back. It is the job the media to keep readers updated but it is not the media's job to scare people into leading lives shut in their own homes,
This "fear driven journalism" is why most young adults do not want anything to do with watching the news or reading the newspaper. If they don't know about the horrible things that are going on then they can't feel bad or worry about it. The ignorance is not bliss because if people, young included, don't know what is going on in the world they cannot make educated decisions. Young adults are the future and the future should be given the news in an active way instead of a passive, fearful way. I remember when Oprah Winfrey made an episode, not too long ago, about the bird flu and the epidemic that was "supposed" to hit us at anytime. In retrospect i feel like a fool the way i believed it and talked about it. Being well educated about news and more importantly, who's giving the news, helps to know who is credible and who to trust.
I agree with this ethics blog. We are a nation easily swayed by fear. As soon as a threat even has the possibility of coming stateside, the media jumps on it and hypes it up. I remember when I was young the Africanized killer bees were on their way to kill. Some B-rated movies were even made on the premise. The bird flu recently received the same treatment. Now, it looks as thought this staph infection crisis is the latest object the media is hyping up.
I believe it is the media’s responsibility to report on hazardous things that could affect the people of this country, but there should be some restraint. It almost appears as though when some problem arises, the media starts running around screaming bloody murder. They should handle it tactfully and responsibly. Otherwise, regular people will be terrified to leave their house and the hypochondriacs of the nation might start to think they have whatever the subject of the crisis is.
I have a question. Was AIDS just a fear-mongering story? The truth about AIDS was ignored for years to the peril of many, many people. President Reagan wouldn't even say the word publicly for years, despite the valient attempts of the press to report the story. Had it not been for the press, I wonder how long it would have taken to raise awareness, which lead to research, which lead to HIV being more of a chronic condition than a death sentence.
For all of you who say Avian Influenza reporting is fear-mongering, look again. Avian Influenza hasn't gone anywhere. It is still spreading. It is still the number one threat to global public health in the world. Just look at some of the quotes from Margaret Chan of the WHO (World Health Organization).
Also, get your facts straight. That's the number one problem with journalism today. If people got their facts straight, panic would not be a problem. First of all, MRSA is not a virus! It is a bacteria. Secondly, the reason the public needs to be aware of MRSA is that there are measures that they can take to protect themselves from unnecessary illness and death. Informing the public of good hygiene techniques and how to spot unhealthy practices is a good story. Shining a spotlight on overuse of antibiotics is an important part of public health education. The problem is sensationalism, not reporting the truth.
I don't see how this article is challenging ethics. The media does use scare tactics to grab attention, but they have been doing it since the news started, that is how they get their viewers. Everyone is aware of the news's sensationalism, so are you saying that the news has always been unethical in their approaches of news broadcasting? Ethics may not be in play but common sense may be. People still haven’t learned not to believe everything they hear.
This blog brings up a really good point. Time and time again, this the absortbtion of this fear has been demonstrated in Prof. Fox's J30 class when we have our group stories. It seems that there is an apparent thread of theme in everyones stories;fear. It seems as if the media wants us to stay indoors and wait for the next big warning. When I came back from Mexico from being with my family, I paid attention to the news everyday, and I cannot remember the moment that there was something positive on the news. Actually, the president vowed to stop marijuana trafficking in my native state of Michoacan, but many have died due to violence associated with the president's new plan.
I belive the media has always used fear to grab our attention. That is what makes the news so interesting. Think back to 1999 when the news made everyone think that the world was coming to an end and we would be without electricity. I remember all of my neighbors stocking up on canned goods and toilet paper and what happened? Absoulutely nothing! Fear driven storys sad to say make people interested in the news because it makes us think that if we don't walk on eggshells in our lifes then we can catch the "bird flu" or be attacked by "kiler bees". I don't belive it is right to make one life threatning issue more dramatic than the other because no matter what way you look at it all the storys are the same. Your health in regards to a staph infection is just as important to your health in regards to aids because they both can kill you and that is the main issue. It is not right of journalists to drive fear in their readers. They should be trying to drive awarness. You always have to be cautious of your health or the way you live your life and the news should not sway us to think more highly of an important health issue than another just becasue it is the current top story of the moment.
I agree with this blog. There is so many different types of media in our society now and almost all of them portray some sort of fear. Fear is a very manipulative and can alter a society's view on a subject. In the SPJ Code of ethics it says“not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.” Many news stories take incidents out of context such as the staph infection story. When writing journalists should try to avoid this type of writing and figure out another approach to write the story.
I agree with the idea that the media does sometimes take the fear tactics too far. At the same time, the American public should be able to believe what they want to believe and they have the right to know what is going on in our world. If this infection could potentially get worse or spread more, we have the right to know. People may be taking this infection lighter than it should be, who knows what could happen with it in the future. I feel that the audience of news has a lot of responsibility in what they choose to believe and watch in the news. If you do not want to hear about staph infections, don't listen. The media has been using this tactic forever and to me it is not bad because of the whole "crying wolf" thing.
I agree with this ethics blog as well. I think that fear driven news is used very often and it is not necessary. I think we should be able to get the news in a way that does not leave us scared after reading it. The reason I think this technique is used is because it does grab our attention and makes us read the rest of the story. It also makes it so the information sticks in our memory because we remember things that make us fearful but this does not make it ethical.
I agree!! The large majority of the news is negative and stories that I feel ar designed to scare us. We were all made to be terrified about the bird flu, staph, and much more about of scary world. The news and media overexagerate and hype up horror stories. Our world is not perfect but the news could defnitly cover some more positive and important stories.
I couldn't agree more with the journalist who wrote this article.It seems all journalism and the news does it talk about the different ways we could die everyday.I watched the news around thanksgiving and I was bombarded with talk about high cholesterol and overeating and fat and death...its depressing. We already have enough to worry about with jobs, and college, and families and journalist often times add fuel to the fire.I think it had alot to do with 9/11 journalist took advantage of the fact that many americans we're afraid and they built on it..which is my book is definately unethical.
The goal of the media is to scare, entertain, and influence our emotion to act in general. When they stop doing this, they will cease to become an important part of our lives.
Post a Comment