Even with these issues, more reporters should have covered this story. The lack of attention from the press is just another example of the decline in global health coverage at US media outlets. Too bad, because international media like the Guardian and the AFP picked up the story. Not covering the results might make it harder for journalists to explain why UN programs might not work in the future. When we’re not seeing results/better quality of health after throwing millions of dollars to dubious projects, in say, India, journalists are going to have to go back and explain.
The Lancet study provided one of those rare, opportune moments to help news readers, according to an editorial in the Lancet, understand “quantitatively what many observers have seen qualitatively.” By not educating the public on the shifting landscape of organizations’ assistance, we risk a future where the WHO won’t be the predominant authority in promoting global health. Whether that’s a good or bad thing is up to the public to decide, but right now newsreaders are in the dark. We wish journalists spread the word a little bit more.
- 1
- 2





Recent Comments
-
Mike_in_Ohio on
Well, It May Deserve an Award in Something
(35)
-
robert elegant on
Not For All the News in China, Part I
(4)
-
Jordan Fogal on
LAT's Lazarus Alone Questions BofA Arbitration Move
(9)
-
Rick Brown on
What's a News Brief Worth?
(1)
-
Thimbles on
Strike a Pose—Rogue (Rogue, Rogue…)
(77)
-
JDS on
Popular Diplomacy
(12)
-
Donald Isenman on
Everybody's On Edge
(1)
-
JSF on
Greg Craig and Transparency
(1)
More