When I was science editor of US News in the 1990s, we had copyeditors and a fact-checking department. All gone now; nobody wants to pay for accuracy. Copyeditors in a city newsroom, 1952, courtesy National Archives.
This is true for health, medicine, and science as well as general news. This means most people are getting health news this way:
Oprah has 8.5 million viewers daily. Monthly uniques to the CDC website in April 2009, during the beginning of the swine flu pandemic:
This story was not reported by US News. It is a press release from the Carnegie Institution that was distributed by the National Science Foundation.
Applied Content was bought on May 18. 2010 by Yahoo for about $100 million. It publishes 2,000 stories a day. The 15 editors can spend about 2 minutes on each story. Contributors make about $5 per story.
Although studies indicate people are skeptical of Internet news sources, self-reinforcing communities make it easy for bad science to flourish online. Calling people stupid for believing junk science isn’t going to help, particularly when the quality of medical reporting in the mainstream media is so bad.
Accurate reporting takes time and money. The public and scientists often disagree on trusted names, like Oprah. Few news organizations have internal standards for quality reporting. Almost none explain how they report and fact check.
The Knight-funded Tracker has been critiquing science journalism since May 2006, and recently added health and medical coverage. It’s mostly inside baseball, but it’s a start.
Former CNN reporter Gary Schwitzer launched Health News Review in 2006, patterning it on Media Doctor Australia. He concluded that TV coverage of health and medicine is so terrible, he no longer rates it. Similar to Annenberg-funded FactCheck.Org, but focused on medical news.
Is it OK to rewrite a press release? Or to run a press release as news? How many sources you do need for a news report on a journal article? Does your news organization have any guidelines for reporters and editors on quality?