What is it about the “news” media that prevents them from producing honest coverage of health care issues? Are all editors and producers congenitally incapable of telling the truth?
I was inspired to ask this question by the articles I have read in the last 24 hours about the latest health care survey from the Commonwealth Fund. Here’s a sample:
The non-profit Commonwealth Fund, a charitable group promoting health care reform, found that 82 percent of adults surveyed believe that the US health care system is in need of a complete overhaul.
Only that’s not what the survey says. What the survey actually found was that only 32% advocate rebuilding the system completely. Here are the percentages on each choice offered by the survey:
|
Minor changes needed |
Fundamental changes needed |
Rebuild completely |
|
16% |
50% |
32% |
So, the largest cohort of respondents went with the “fundamental changes” choice. Well, guess what? This isn’t news. No serious observer doubts that U.S. health care needs structural changes.
The national health care debate isn’t about whether we need change. It is about what sort of change is required: Do we need market-based reform or some government-imposed restructuring?
If the “news” media would stick to honest reporting on health care issues, the health care debate would be a far more constructive exercise.
Comments 1
Oh yes, and look at what the people thought was wrong. Not the health insurance, but the communication skills of the doctors and the coordination between various docs treating the same patients. But why should we expect them to go for the story instead of the headline.
Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 4:09 pm ¶Post a Comment