How has opinion based reporting hurt the health care debate? To answer this, we must look at the way in which people get their news. We look to the 5 o’clock news or the cable 24 hour news sources. We trust that they are doing the work of fact checking before they put out information. But this is not necessarily the case
Take, for example, in the run up to the 2008 presidential election; we were bombarded with reports on the economy and Governor Sarah Palin’s choice of wardrobe as if they were of “equal importance” (Manderscheid, 2008). In his report discussing the need to seize the opportunity after the 2008 elections to reform our healthcare system, Ronald W. Manderscheid wrote:
“We hope that the Obama administration will take on national health reform, involving universal coverage, system reform, and financing reform. However, if this happens, we will need to develop "new arguments" about health. For starters, we must ask how national health reform can help us rebuild the American economy.”
Unfortunately, as the debate continued to intensify, we began to see propaganda pieces fill the airwaves. Everything from how reform would bankrupt the country, to public health care leading to the death of a loved one by a death panel.
Many of the elderly were quite vocal and concerned since such claims could directly affect them. This is a very real concern that is nothing new. We have been engaged in this fight for quite some time. Looking back to when Clinton was in office from 1992 – 2000, we have sought ways to get a hold of the increased spending. The fact that “Medicare is the biggest single source of payment for health care in America” (Binstock 1993) was true then, and is still true now, is telling. This highlights the need to get health care spending under control.
News organizations such as FOX News regularly employ commentators who broadcast their opinion as fact. Take, for example, the recent outcries of television host Glenn Beck and his statement about President Obama being racist against white people. Clearly the statement was designed to be inflammatory, and it is evidence that news outlets are trying to get the average American’s attention. Increased viewership equals increased ad revenue.
Now advertisers are starting to react when shows go too far. According to Kenneth Hein of the Hollywood Reporter, in the case of the Glenn Beck Program, advertisers are pulling their ads from the show. In some cases, the dollars are being repositioned elsewhere in the networks programming. Fox representatives are quick to point out that they are not experiencing a loss in revenue because of the ads being pulled (Hein, 2009).
Nonetheless, it is a clear indication that the American people will only tolerate so much. Still, our attention is diverted from the debate.
In the end, the burden falls to each of us. We must seek sources that help us lay the framework for debate. Using the local library and reputable periodicals will also provide factual material. In the end, the analysis is up to each of us. We must make up our own minds and in the end take a position.
by Malcolm X. Moore
References
Binstock, R H (July-August 1993). Older people and health care reform. American Behavioral Scientist, 36, n6. p.823(18).
Hein, K. (August 13, 2009). Advertisers pull 'Beck' spots: Geico exits Fox News show after host calls President Obama a racist.(INSIDE TRACK: TELEVISION). Hollywood Reporter, 411, 3. p.5(1).
Manderscheid, R W (Dec 2008). Change is coming! We must ensure our Agenda is on lawmaker's radars.(THE MANDERSCHEID REPORT). Behavioral Healthcare, 28, 12. p.36(2).
Comments