http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harold-pollack/no-vaccines-arent-behind-_b_89305.html
Harold Pollack was mentioned by name by Trudy Lieberman during her speech. It was in reference to the coverage in the media about "Obama Care". According to Lieberman, Pollack has said somewhere that the coverage for Obama Care was 'the best ever'.
Her response to this was that we need to be 'careful of what we mean by good coverage'.
As an example of what I would consider good coverage of health care in the media, I would like to refer to a blog written by Pollack for the Huffington Post dealing with the belief that there is a link between vaccinations and Autism.
"Harold Pollack is Helen Ross Professor of Social Service Administration, and Faculty Chair of the Center for Health Administration Studies at the University of Chicago."
I like how early on he mentions how there are four million children born in America each year and that most of them will benefit from vacines. I also like that he mentions right after this that for some, vaccines are a problem.
He talks about the imperfect science behind vaccines, as well as warning of the dangers of spreading false information.
I also like that he posts links to reliable scientific data on the problem.
In his blog he talks about how there is no scientific data to support the link between autism and vaccines.
Later in the blog he shows evidence of a very real link between outbreaks of meazels amongst children who have not been vaccinated.
The numbers provided in this example are given in context, making them meaningful.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/18/jeremy-hunt-elderly-care-asia
For my example of what I think isn't very good coverage of a health care issue I am citing this article from the Guardian which talks about the care of the elderly.
This article was written by Hans Schattle and it discusses how Jeremy Hunt is trying to encourage England to adopt a system for treating the elderly that is more like the system in Asia.
Having lived in one of the countries he mentions I have to admit there is some truth when he says that fewer and fewer people in Korea are tolerating living with their elderly relatives and that these elderly relatives are in trouble because many of them didn't have a pension, or had an insufficient pension. (the idea of a pension is a relatively new concept in this country - many elder people are forced to retire and then they work for themselves selling vegetables in the street)
The big problem with this is he doesn't give it any context and therefore it's hard to judge how much weight there is to this side of the argument.
The same is true when he says how there are three times as many elderly people who live in poverty. What does this mean? The way he puts it, it sounds like a lot, but since there are no numbers to back it up, it doesn't have a lot of weight.
He says that in Asia the younger generations are less willing to take care of the elderly. My question to him would be, less willing than what?
Since I don't know what it is being compared to, its hard for me to draw a conclusion as to what type of change has occurred, and truly how significant it is.
Monday 28 October 2013
Trudy Lieberman and the Affordable Care Act
Going in to see and hear Trudy Lieberman speak I didn't know very much about the American Health Care System, even with the constant coverage in the media over the U.S. government shutdown over the debt ceiling and what the Affordable Care Act, which has been given the name, Obama Care.
"Trudy Lieberman is a past president of the Association of Health Care Journalists in the U.S and she is visiting four Canadian cities this fall as a Fulbright Scholar and guest of the Evidence Network.".
During her speech she explained some of the differences between the Canadian and American systems.
She also specifically outlined some of the problems inherent in this system and how it has been making it harder for individuals without full time employment, who aren't receiving government support, to get health insurance.
She mentioned how there are people in America who may have health conditions like asthma (I have asthma), and how their policies will not cover these health conditions.
She also spoke about how these people often have to pay high insurance rates along with a high deductible.
The reason for this is that they don't have anyone to 'share the risk' when they go it alone with their health insurance.
The more people there are in a health plan, the more people there are to share the risk with.
With universal health care, Canadians share the risk with all other Canadians.
People in the U.S. who receive health coverage as a benefit of full time employment, share the risk with all of their fellow employees.
Much of her speech focused on how the media covers health care.
She was not happy with the press coverage of the Affordable Care Act. Her biggest complaint with it was that it didn't do enough to explain what it was to the public.
Another complaint she had was that she saw the press as a follower, when before, they used to go out and 'find the news'.
Balance was also a major subject she addressed. She was openly critical of what she referred to as 'he said, she said' journalism.
She did not feel every side or opinion deserved equal weight. The weight something was to be given was to be based on its validity.
A final major topic she discussed was 'the source', and she was very critical of every press agency relying on the same few, selected experts, especially when she wasn't sure of the authority that some of these so called experts had in their field.
She also spoke about not letting one person's story speak for everyone, especially if that person's story is not the typical story of everyone.
In such cases it was very important to remember that evidence should always be presented in the proper contexts in order to give it weight.
(more to come)
"Trudy Lieberman is a past president of the Association of Health Care Journalists in the U.S and she is visiting four Canadian cities this fall as a Fulbright Scholar and guest of the Evidence Network.".
During her speech she explained some of the differences between the Canadian and American systems.
She also specifically outlined some of the problems inherent in this system and how it has been making it harder for individuals without full time employment, who aren't receiving government support, to get health insurance.
She mentioned how there are people in America who may have health conditions like asthma (I have asthma), and how their policies will not cover these health conditions.
She also spoke about how these people often have to pay high insurance rates along with a high deductible.
The reason for this is that they don't have anyone to 'share the risk' when they go it alone with their health insurance.
The more people there are in a health plan, the more people there are to share the risk with.
With universal health care, Canadians share the risk with all other Canadians.
People in the U.S. who receive health coverage as a benefit of full time employment, share the risk with all of their fellow employees.
Much of her speech focused on how the media covers health care.
She was not happy with the press coverage of the Affordable Care Act. Her biggest complaint with it was that it didn't do enough to explain what it was to the public.
Another complaint she had was that she saw the press as a follower, when before, they used to go out and 'find the news'.
Balance was also a major subject she addressed. She was openly critical of what she referred to as 'he said, she said' journalism.
She did not feel every side or opinion deserved equal weight. The weight something was to be given was to be based on its validity.
A final major topic she discussed was 'the source', and she was very critical of every press agency relying on the same few, selected experts, especially when she wasn't sure of the authority that some of these so called experts had in their field.
She also spoke about not letting one person's story speak for everyone, especially if that person's story is not the typical story of everyone.
In such cases it was very important to remember that evidence should always be presented in the proper contexts in order to give it weight.
(more to come)
Monday 21 October 2013
My Day in Court
It was the first time I had ever been to the Manitoba provincial court. We were supposed to be there for 9:15 to meet up with the rest of the class, but we also had to get through security. Not knowing what to expect I showed up a half an hour early at 8:45.
I guess I was expecting it to be just like the airport and I didn't want to miss my flight.
After getting through security I made a left and headed towards the spot where all of the court cases for the day had been posted. In vain I tried to make sense of them, or to find something useful, but I wasn't able to find anything.
I sat down and spotted my journalism instructor as he looked over the court schedule. As he did a woman came up to him and gave him a big hug. As I went over to say hello I overheard that she was there to testify.
Soon after our instructor took us on a brief tour of where some of the court rooms were, as well as the spot on the main floor where they post information about cases for the media.
At 9:30 we met with James Turner from the Winnipeg Free Press. He gave us the low down and some tips as to where we might be able to find a good story.
For lunch we walked to Portage Place. It was cold out and I didn't have a hat. I had been worried about getting in trouble in the court room after our instructor advised us not to wear one. Two people tried to wear hats in court rooms I was in today. They were both told to take them off.
Apparently Brendan was hoping this was going to happen. He was hoping I would get in trouble. It would have given him a great story to write about, he would say during the break.
The deadline for the story was 6 pm and as time got closer, the pressure seemed to get stronger and stronger.
Lately I've discovered that deadlines stress me out. I guess I'm going to have to find a healthy way to deal with them. (are deadlines important for journalists?)
After I don't know how many revisions, I was finally able to hand my story in. I guess that means I'm going to have to apologize for killing so many trees.
Sorry trees.
rymr
I guess I was expecting it to be just like the airport and I didn't want to miss my flight.
After getting through security I made a left and headed towards the spot where all of the court cases for the day had been posted. In vain I tried to make sense of them, or to find something useful, but I wasn't able to find anything.
I sat down and spotted my journalism instructor as he looked over the court schedule. As he did a woman came up to him and gave him a big hug. As I went over to say hello I overheard that she was there to testify.
Soon after our instructor took us on a brief tour of where some of the court rooms were, as well as the spot on the main floor where they post information about cases for the media.
At 9:30 we met with James Turner from the Winnipeg Free Press. He gave us the low down and some tips as to where we might be able to find a good story.
For lunch we walked to Portage Place. It was cold out and I didn't have a hat. I had been worried about getting in trouble in the court room after our instructor advised us not to wear one. Two people tried to wear hats in court rooms I was in today. They were both told to take them off.
Apparently Brendan was hoping this was going to happen. He was hoping I would get in trouble. It would have given him a great story to write about, he would say during the break.
The deadline for the story was 6 pm and as time got closer, the pressure seemed to get stronger and stronger.
Lately I've discovered that deadlines stress me out. I guess I'm going to have to find a healthy way to deal with them. (are deadlines important for journalists?)
After I don't know how many revisions, I was finally able to hand my story in. I guess that means I'm going to have to apologize for killing so many trees.
Sorry trees.
rymr
Monday 14 October 2013
The Future of Journalism Revisited
Engagement.
I was watching an interview with Arianna Huffington, who founded the Huffington post on the Lang and O'Leary Exchange on CBC Newsworld and this word kept coming up. She was talking about the future of journalism.
At the beginning of the year all of the Journalism Majors at Red River College this year were asked to blog about what they felt the future of journalism was. Watching this interview reminded me and caused me to want to take a look back at what some of us had written.
I missed the point a little, and now, having given the matter some further thought, I would like to expand on what I said.
I focused on how some believe the rise of the citizen journalist and free internet content spells the imminent end of the profession of journalism.
Now I feel like my answer is incomplete.
Arianna Huffington said on the program that she wasn't sure exactly what the 'platform' would be to deliver journalism in the future. She even suggested that there could be many platforms.
The one common denominator she felt was engagement. She feels that the days of the journalist providing the news from up on high are over. Now it's all about the interaction between the journalist and the reader.
I have a little bit of first hand experience with this. For the last seven years or so I have had an online correspondence with Dave Molinari, who covers the Pittsburgh Penguins for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
I have to admit that as a journalist and a student of communications that I struggle with the social media. In 2007 I reluctantly signed up for Facebook, and that was only because I had just moved to Korea and didn't know anyone in the country.
As a journalist of the future I am going to have to do a lot more.
In terms of content this means being able to write, provide video, audio, and still pictures.
In terms of interaction, it means going on social web sites like Twitter, Facebook and others, not just
to write, but also to read.
Often as a journalist we are warned not to read the comments in the comment section of an article that they have published. I now think this is wrong, and the last thing we should do.
We need to read what the readers are writing. This means the good and the bad.
Huffington also spoke about the comments section and how the Huffington Post pre-screens their comments and no longer allows anonymous comments.
I'm not sure if I agree with not allowing anonymous comments because in some ways I think that is the only free speech that still truly exists.
I was watching an interview with Arianna Huffington, who founded the Huffington post on the Lang and O'Leary Exchange on CBC Newsworld and this word kept coming up. She was talking about the future of journalism.
At the beginning of the year all of the Journalism Majors at Red River College this year were asked to blog about what they felt the future of journalism was. Watching this interview reminded me and caused me to want to take a look back at what some of us had written.
I missed the point a little, and now, having given the matter some further thought, I would like to expand on what I said.
I focused on how some believe the rise of the citizen journalist and free internet content spells the imminent end of the profession of journalism.
Now I feel like my answer is incomplete.
Arianna Huffington said on the program that she wasn't sure exactly what the 'platform' would be to deliver journalism in the future. She even suggested that there could be many platforms.
The one common denominator she felt was engagement. She feels that the days of the journalist providing the news from up on high are over. Now it's all about the interaction between the journalist and the reader.
I have a little bit of first hand experience with this. For the last seven years or so I have had an online correspondence with Dave Molinari, who covers the Pittsburgh Penguins for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
I have to admit that as a journalist and a student of communications that I struggle with the social media. In 2007 I reluctantly signed up for Facebook, and that was only because I had just moved to Korea and didn't know anyone in the country.
As a journalist of the future I am going to have to do a lot more.
In terms of content this means being able to write, provide video, audio, and still pictures.
In terms of interaction, it means going on social web sites like Twitter, Facebook and others, not just
to write, but also to read.
Often as a journalist we are warned not to read the comments in the comment section of an article that they have published. I now think this is wrong, and the last thing we should do.
We need to read what the readers are writing. This means the good and the bad.
Huffington also spoke about the comments section and how the Huffington Post pre-screens their comments and no longer allows anonymous comments.
I'm not sure if I agree with not allowing anonymous comments because in some ways I think that is the only free speech that still truly exists.
Monday 7 October 2013
In the field
I can't help myself so I think I should just come right out and admit it. I enjoy doing field work as a journalism major.
I find it funny admitting to this especially after the rough beginning that I had to my career during first year journalism.
When we were given our first streeter assignment I was incredibly nervous. I also felt guilty.
"This is how people who work in call centers feel,"I thought.
I just felt like I was bothering people who were otherwise occupied, when I went up to them to kindly ask if they would answer a few questions for me.
We would have to get two quotes from two different people, so as soon as I got my second quote I would head back to class and try to write my story.
The only problem was the quotes I got weren't all that great. There was something incomplete in them because I had failed to ask the proper follow up questions.
I remember going to the Bomber game assignment last year and having this big sigh of relief when I saw someone I knew in the section I was sitting in. I felt this would be enough to get a story and I wouldn't have to 'bother' anyone at the football game.
I ended up only quoting one person and failing because I needed at least two. There had been others there, I was just too nervous to approach them.
I spoke with my first semester Jounralism instructor, and she told me that I should have a purpose in mind whenever I went out to interview someone. This idea really seemed to help.
Last summer I was in Korea shooting a documentary about English teachers. In total I ended up interviewing around thirty people from all over the world. Some of them were my friends and some were not.
I got a few of my interview subjects through Facebook. In Korea they have groups on Facebook for everything ex-pat related. I put a few posts on there and got a few hits.
One of my favourite interview sessions took place on a rooftop in Incheon, the sight of the famous amphibious landing that turned the tide of the Korean War.
I got a lot of practice at doing work in the field. The more I did, the more I started to realize how much I enjoyed going out and talking to people.
A few weeks ago, when my class covered Justin Trudeau's appearance in Lorette, I felt quite comfortable. I worked the room and in a way I felt like I owned it.
By the end people started coming up to me to talk, and they were not bothering me.
Something had changed. I had discovered that I really like what I do.
Afterwards I was so excited I couldn't sleep. Now I just gotta get over the anxiety I have over deadlines. If anyone has any advice, please let me know.
cheers,
rymr
I find it funny admitting to this especially after the rough beginning that I had to my career during first year journalism.
When we were given our first streeter assignment I was incredibly nervous. I also felt guilty.
"This is how people who work in call centers feel,"I thought.
I just felt like I was bothering people who were otherwise occupied, when I went up to them to kindly ask if they would answer a few questions for me.
We would have to get two quotes from two different people, so as soon as I got my second quote I would head back to class and try to write my story.
The only problem was the quotes I got weren't all that great. There was something incomplete in them because I had failed to ask the proper follow up questions.
I remember going to the Bomber game assignment last year and having this big sigh of relief when I saw someone I knew in the section I was sitting in. I felt this would be enough to get a story and I wouldn't have to 'bother' anyone at the football game.
I ended up only quoting one person and failing because I needed at least two. There had been others there, I was just too nervous to approach them.
I spoke with my first semester Jounralism instructor, and she told me that I should have a purpose in mind whenever I went out to interview someone. This idea really seemed to help.
Last summer I was in Korea shooting a documentary about English teachers. In total I ended up interviewing around thirty people from all over the world. Some of them were my friends and some were not.
I got a few of my interview subjects through Facebook. In Korea they have groups on Facebook for everything ex-pat related. I put a few posts on there and got a few hits.
One of my favourite interview sessions took place on a rooftop in Incheon, the sight of the famous amphibious landing that turned the tide of the Korean War.
I got a lot of practice at doing work in the field. The more I did, the more I started to realize how much I enjoyed going out and talking to people.
A few weeks ago, when my class covered Justin Trudeau's appearance in Lorette, I felt quite comfortable. I worked the room and in a way I felt like I owned it.
By the end people started coming up to me to talk, and they were not bothering me.
Something had changed. I had discovered that I really like what I do.
Afterwards I was so excited I couldn't sleep. Now I just gotta get over the anxiety I have over deadlines. If anyone has any advice, please let me know.
cheers,
rymr
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)