Chinmaya IAS Academy – Current Affairs Chinmaya IAS Academy – Current Affairs
Related Articles
On two headlines used last week — one of which was misleading and the other problematic When Joy reached us through Happy, we expected to feel ecstatic, but it was to find fault with our journalism. Dr. Joy, a Consultant Neurologist and Movement Disorders Specialist at Aswini Hospital in Thrissur, Kerala, got in touch with us through one of our opinion page writers, Happymon Jacob, to say that the headline for an important medical story was “fatally” misleading. He was referring to a Press Trust of India’s report carried in the Life page of the newspaper: “Aspirin does not reduce heart attack, stroke risk” (September 18). Writing with caveats The report was based on three studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine , which showed that daily low-dose aspirin (100 mg), when initiated in otherwise healthy people from the age of 70 onwards, has no benefit in prolonging a life free of disability, or substantially reducing the risk of having the first heart attack or stroke. The study had a good sample size of 19,000 people, it was done over seven years, and it was published in a respected journal. Yet, the report is seen as misleading by many practising doctors because the 250-odd words of journalistic writing failed to provide all the caveats that go along with such research. Dr. Joy did accept that some important studies published in some medical journals of international repute found that aspirin use in order to primarily prevent stroke among the elderly does more harm than good. However, he felt that the headline may prove fatal for some general readers who may stop taking aspirin altogether after reading the report. “Aspirin does prevent stroke and coronary heart disease if given to patients as a secondary prophylaxis, meaning those people who have risk factors for vascular disease like diabetes mellitus, systemic hypertension, dyslipidemia, etc.,” he said. Reporting on health research requires space for details. Newspapers use an inverted pyramid structure, where important facts are stated in the beginning of the report, and the page editors have the right to cut the bottom few lines or paragraphs of the story in case the word count of the report exceeds what the space can contain. Both the reporters and the desk instinctively follow this method. For health reports, however, it is better to opt for the rules that govern long-form journalism. The foundational belief of journalism is to minimise harm, and if it were to even inadvertently contribute to irreparable loss, then it no longer performs its role as the site of common good.
Source : https://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-opinion/the-headline-conundrum/article25023766.ece
