 |
|
Reply
| |
QUOTE: Popular media coverage of infectious diseases greatly influences how people perceive those diseases, making them seem more dangerous, according to a new study from McMaster University...
"The media tend to focus on rare and dramatic events," says Meredith Young, one of the study's lead authors and a graduate student in the Department of Psychology, Neuroscience & Behaviour. "When a certain disease receives repeated coverage in the press, people tend to focus on it and perceive it as a real threat. This raises concerns regarding how people view their own health, how they truly understand disease and how they treat themselves..." UNQUOTE.
Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081029121818.htm
What's interesting is that even when the media gets something totally wrong, for example, all the reports about how "HIV/AIDS" was going to kill millions of Americans, "crossing over" into the heterosexual population, they don't question claims that can't possibly be correct (though of course there are a few notable exceptions, such as Celia Farber). |
|
Reply
| |
| There's actually a book that shows how the claims about "HIV" and "AIDS" changed over the years, from the tentative initial reports to possessing a sense of definitiveness, within the space of several years, despite no additional evidence of importance being published. I know I cited it somewhere. It was written by a woman who was a historian but then became a journalist. If I remember, I'll post back here with the citation. That one section about how "HIV/AIDS" reporting changed was certainly worth reading, in the context of this thread. |
|
|
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
First