‘Devil’s drug’ needs media attention

Posted on February 25, 2016 by Grace Bernard

By GRACE BERNARD

Since 2014, the designer drug flakka has silently terrorized the streets of South Florida. With the number of users rising throughout the U.S., flakka needs national media attention now more than ever.

Flakka is a highly addictive synthetic drug. According to drugsabuse.gov, side effects include paranoia, hyperstimulation, and hallucinations that can lead to “violent aggression and self-injury. The drug has been linked to deaths by suicide and heart attack.”

Other side effects include super-human strength, a likely result of an adrenaline rush. Also users are known to strip naked due to a massive rise in body temperatures associated with the drugs consumption.

Flakka’s biggest threat is that the U.S. population is under the assumption that the drug’s usage is contained to South Florida, where it is by far the most concentrated. Because of this, news media coverage has been vastly limited to local South Florida news organizations such as The Miami Herald, The Palm Beach Post, and The Sun Sentinel.

Flakka usage is spreading quickly and the lack of media coverage leaves many people in danger, particularly young people in poor urban neighborhoods. Flakka is particularly accessible to this group because it’s so cheap. Without any education from the national press, thousands of people are in danger. According to Forbes.com, flakka usage has spread to Chicago, Texas, Kentucky and Ohio. The drug is only growing more popular, especially with the lack of education nationwide.

One example of the grave disparities in flakka’s news media coverage compared to other drugs was in early 2014 when the DEA officially categorized it as a Schedule 1 drug. Despite the importance of this, the news did not make any major national headlines.

Less traditional forms of media have been more prominent in the coverage of the drug. YouTube has a variety of videos about flakka. Some videos were educational, while the majority were recordings of people high on the drug. These videos had thousands of views, with some of them even having millions. The population clearly has an interest in flakka and is seeking out more information.

The need for public education about flakka is evident. While flakka is not a nationwide issue yet, it is already well on its way. The duty is on the news media to provide coverage about this silent killer because they’re the best equipped to handle the potential crisis.

The bathroom bill problem

Posted on February 19, 2016 by Robyn Shapiro

By ROBYN SHAPIRO

The Senate of South Dakota has recently voted to approve a “bathroom bill.” The bathroom bill states that students would have to use the bathroom based on their “chromosomes and autonomy” at birth, rather than what they identify with now. This bill not only attacks the LGBT community, but also completely discriminates against transgender students.

State representative Fred Deutsch, who was in favor of the bill, stated this is necessary in order to protect the “bodily privacy rights” of “biologic boys and girls” and that if transgender students were uncomfortable with this, they could use private accommodations. He refused to do a follow-up interview with Time magazine on this statement.

Time provided a first-hand example of how this law could effect transgender students when they interviewed Rebecca Dodds, the mother of a transgender boy who had recently graduated high school in South Dakota.

Her son stated that the idea of using the girl’s rest room was so uncomfortable for him, he would avoid using the bathroom the entire day. Because of this, he contracted multiple urine infections and had other health-related issues throughout his high school career.

The identity struggle for transgender students is a difficult enough issue that having a law to further isolate them from normalcy would only contribute to their existing insecurities. While conservative America considers the sensitivity of the standardized “norm”, liberal America considers the sensitivity of all.

I believe Time magazine did an excellent job providing a non-biased, yet informative, opinion on this current issue. They provided opinions from both the pro and con sides, while further examining how this law would affect transgender people and the LGBT community outside of the school system.

While much of our American population is socially conservation, our younger generations are growing be more and more liberal. The media needs to continue to report these issues with sensitivity and compassion as our society progresses into acceptance.

Water crisis hits Flint residents

Posted on February 5, 2016 by Breana Ross

By BREANA ROSS

Much like Ferguson and Baltimore, Flint was a city plagued with crime and challenges that was forgotten by its own nation until tragedy struck and lives were lost or endangered.

This time, however, lives were not lost at the hand of a law enforcement officer exerting illegal force. Lives were lost at the hand of the State of Michigan, which failed to meet a basic need of its residents: clean and safe water.

This week, in the latest in a long series of developments in the story, news reports are saying Gov. Rick Snyder’s administration knew of potential links between the Flint water problems and Legionnaires’ disease.

Two years ago, city officials decided to switch Flint’s source of water from the Detroit River to a new system that would not be ready for use for two years. In the meantime, the government decided to use the water from the Flint River as the city’s source. The highly corrosive river water transported by the city’s lead pipes produced contaminated water in the homes of Flint residents. Although tests proved otherwise, the city and state governments assured residents that the water was safe and drinkable.

Now, two years later, residents of Flint have fallen ill. Flint’s water issue has gone from local media coverage to national and even international coverage.

The media coverage of Flint focuses mainly on what went wrong and images of the water itself rather than on resolutions of the problem. Many of the news stories on Flint show visual footage of the toxic, brown water coming from resident’s tap. They also explain the failures of the state and local government that lead to such a catastrophe. Residents tell of the unwanted changes in their lives.

While these are very important components to the story, I think the more important question is how this problem will be solved. Although the media have shown large donations of bottled water going to Flint, that is only a short-term fix. The media should focus more on when and how the lead pipes carrying the water will be replaced and how the work will be funded.

There should be more of a focus on how the problem will be fixed in the long run so that a crisis like this never happens again.

Zika virus: Fearing the unknown

Posted on February 5, 2016 by Robyn Shapiro

By ROBYN SHAPIRO

Every news station, newspaper and social media network alike has been fixated over Zika.

Zika is a virus, native to Africa and found in South America, that has wildly spread to Latin America, the Caribbean and some places in the United States. While the side effects aren’t life threatening (flu-like symptoms, pink eye and fever) the virus is most dangerous to pregnant women.

If women are infected with the virus while pregnant, their child has a high likelihood of being born with microcephaly. Microcephaly stunts head growth early on in fetal development, causing the child to be born with an abnormally small head and metal disabilities.

The World Health Organization has advised pregnant women not to travel to Latin American countries. They have also advised women who live in Latin American or South American countries not to get pregnant for at least two years.

Recently it was reported in Texas that the disease can be sexually transmitted, which exponentially increases the spread of the viral epidemic.

As a young person, student and someone who cares about my future health, the media have refrained from answering what I think is the most important question: If I am infected with the Zika virus and I want to have children in the future, will they be born with this defect? I know a virus’s symptoms run their course, but will the effects of the virus affect future children?

Do we fear this virus because it is new or because of how it could affect us?

All the news reports are the same and, as informed citizens, the media should make efforts to report on different aspects of the same topic rather than reiterate the well-known facts.

While it is understandable that we do not know enough about the spreading virus, the media should make serious efforts to investigate the case and report information about the disease as fast as possible.

Zika virus: Should we fear the worst?

Posted on February 4, 2016 by Kate Hovan

By KATIE HOVAN

The recent Zika virus outbreak has caused concern around the globe and continues to dominate headlines and newscasts each day.

Zika is a virus transmitted through infected mosquitoes in tropical regions, namely South and Central America. The disease is most problematic for pregnant women, as the virus has been linked to a birth defect known as microcephaly.

Any person who turns on a television or a computer to stay up-to-date on current events can tell you that Zika is spreading rapidly.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health, was recently quoted as saying, “It isn’t as if it’s turning around and dying out, it’s getting worse and worse as the days go by.”

Comments like Fauci’s, which many Zika-related stories seem to be filled with, have the ability to spark fear in millions of people around the globe.

However, a recent article by CNN Specialist Dr. Tom Frieden paints the virus in a different light.

According to Frieden, who is a director at the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),  “from the information we know now, widespread transmission in the contiguous United States appears to be unlikely.”

And while the Zika threat definitely should not be taken lightly, Frieden also states that “science doesn’t have a crystal ball, but the CDC has great laboratories and the world’s best disease detectives.”

Frieden’s article highlights one main point: Zika virus is a serious issue, but it is important to put a health crisis like this into perspective.

The likelihood of many Americans being infected by the virus is small, and the CDC has also dealt with serious crises like Ebola and avian influenza in past years.

The media tend to take disease outbreaks and cover the situation in excess, causing people to assume that each and every new disease has the potential to exterminate humanity.

It is undoubtedly important to do your research and stay informed during an outbreak. But, before you let Zika virus dictate how you live your life, keep your eyes open for lesser known facts and opinions that the media may not put on the front page.

UM inches closer to ending diabetes

Posted on February 4, 2016 by Jean-Paul Aguirre

By JEAN-PAUL AGUIRRE

As a type 1 diabetic, any news of treatments to serious diseases or improvements in healthcare catches my attention. However, it also heightens my skepticism on news coverage.

This past weekend my mother handed me a magazine that is designed to assist diabetics through their daily routines. There was a story documenting a breakthrough treatment — and possible cure — of type 1 diabetes that was discovered at the University of Miami Diabetes Research Institute.

The treatment involved a surgery that transplanted islet cells into the body of a woman, Wendy Peacock, after decades of suffering from type 1 diabetes.

Islet cells are responsible for producing insulin in the body; type 1 diabetics suffer from their body’s immune system destroying these cells, which regulate blood sugar.

This surgery has relieved the patient from having to inject herself with insulin everyday, multiple times a day.

Since this is a breakthrough that can lead to the possible end of a disease that affects around 1.25 million Americans and countless others across the world, I figured that there would be more publicity surrounding it. Well, as far as I can tell, there have been a few articles from The Miami Herald and other medical websites that I have seen online, and some local news channels, like Local 10 News and Channel 7 News, but it has not made its way into mainstream media and news.

Maybe it is old news and that is the reason why I am not seeing the being covered more, but its important news and I think the bigger problem is that news organizations need to broaden their definition of what is considered “newsworthy” because we are saturated with the same information that is being re-circulated for days until another piece of information is released and then the process repeats itself.

Most of the news we are receiving now on TV is about the results of the Iowa caucuses and speculation on the upcoming New Hampshire caucuses. Or on Spanish television, like Telemundo, they are constantly talking about the actress, Kate del Castillo, who is allegedly involved with Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán.

I am beginning to feel that news organizations are becoming more and more fueled by entertainment and ratings, rather than content and getting new, useful information to the public. Before it turns into an uncontrollable circus act, news organizations need to diversify their stories and give their audiences different types of information to process.

When you can have two

Posted on November 3, 2015 by Lingyue Zheng

By LINGYUE ZHENG

Last Thursday, China lifted its one child policy that had applied to this country for three decades. Now, couples can choose to have a second child without fear for various punishments including fines and getting fired.

Loosening a previously tight policy for population control has attracted worldwide attention. The UK’s BBC ran a topic section for consecutive days focusing on termination of the one-child policy that tries to interpret the reason why government ceased this decades-long policy. The New York Times also writes about Chinese new policy change and how this policy had demographically shaped China.

The policy change also triggered heated debate within China. Some people argue that banning the one child policy foreshadows Chinese government’s failure of re-structuring its economic development mode. For decades, the Chinese government has devoted effort to reconstructing the Chinese economy from labor-driven to technology and service driven. Recently, the Chinese economy has slowed and many people attribute the sluggish economy to the scarcity of cheap labor.

Others point out that, though families can choose to have a second child, there are still some barriers preventing unmarried women to have their own children. Some articles even cite some important data to demonstrate that, even couples which have the choice to have a second child, a very small percentage of them will actually give birth to another child due to mounting pressure to raise a child because child birth and rearing require tremendous time and money commitments.

I think the new policy will bring some changes to China. At least for coming years, it will not be rare to see a child who has a sibling. Nevertheless, the change will slight, but not tremendously elevate the total amount of Chinese population. Nowadays more and more people are prioritizing quality over quantity. If parents have fewer kids, they can better apply their limited money and time to cultivate their children and have some spare time to enjoy their own life, rather than strain their energy to feed many mouths and merely make ends meet.

Martin Shkreli, ‘most-hated man’

Posted on September 24, 2015 by Xiao Lyu

By XIAO LYU

This week, Martin Shkreli, the 32-year old CEO of Turing Pharmaceuticals of New York, has earned the title “most-hated man in America.”

Turing Pharmaceuticals bought a drug called Daraprim, the drug can fight toxoplasmosis, which infects people whose immune systems have been weakened by AIDS. However, the company raised the price from $13.50 to $750 for one tablet. According to the latest announcement, the increase of price has been rescinded under the pressure of public opinion.

The conflict was rising when presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton said on her Twitter account on Monday: “Price-gouging like this in the specialty drug market is outrageous. Tomorrow I’ll lay out a plan to take it on.”

However, Shkreli has used television interviews and his own social media account to defend the company and himself.

He told The New York Times earlier, “This isn’t the greedy drug company trying to gouge patients, it is us trying to stay in business.”

Recently, in the interview by CNBC, he said that the infection Daraprim is used to treat had been ignored by the pharmaceutical industry because there was little money to be made. He claimed that the money will be able to educate doctors about the disease, improve delivery to patients, and develop better drugs for the infection.

There is no hope for saving his reputation, especially due to his way of responding on Twitter.

He wrote on Twitter on Monday, “It seems like the media immediately points a finger at me so I point one back at ‘em, but not the index or pinkie.”

He also said that Twitter seems to be a great medium for socialist and liberal rage and declared once again the price of drug will be a great thing for society. According to CNN Money, Shkreli was fired when he was the CEO of Retrophin. The reason he was fired, in addition to his poor management skills, was his irritating Twitter usage.

The whole issue is causing biotechnology stocks to fall across the board, involving the lively attention of the government, politicians, the healthcare field, and the financial industry. At the same time, the explosion of social media and TV networks have also made it a hot topic around the world.

Will flu shot be effective this year?

Posted on September 18, 2015 by Meredith Sloan

By MEREDITH SLOAN

With flu season right around the corner, the annual immunization debate has resurfaced. This season, health officials have something to prove after last year’s mishap.

According to NBC News, a new Type A strain of the flu appeared last year after vaccine doses were already brewed. This caused the vaccination to be less effective than in previous years.

Regardless of last year’s mishap, half of American’s didn’t receive the immunization anyway. Consequently, flu kills about 24,000 people a year in the United States.

Health officials have created alternative methods for receiving the vaccination besides the traditional shot, such as a nasal spray, a higher dose version for senior citizens and a needle-free injection for those who have an aversion to needles.

Although the alternative methods are accommodating, I don’t believe that they will influence an opponent of the immunization to change his mind. When it comes to immunizations, most individuals value their own opinion over that of a health official.

If health officials could prove the effectiveness and strategically market the immunization, opponents may comply. In order for health officials to strategically market the immunization, they would need to prove that the effects of the flu are dangerous and prevalent.

Hopefully, this year’s flu immunizations will protect against the new Type A strain and put a stop to 24,000 preventable deaths.

Media sensationalism risks public health

Posted on November 14, 2014 by Audrey Winkelsas

By AUDREY WINKELSAS

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there have been 20 measles outbreaks in the U.S. between Jan. 1 and Oct. 31 of this year, spread mainly among non-vaccinated individuals. These numbers are among the highest recorded since 1997.

The practice of vaccinating children has been on decline since a 1998 study from the lab of Andrew Wakefield was published claiming that vaccinations cause developmental disorders in children. The article was later retracted when it was discovered to be a dishonest study that violated research ethics.

Many hypotheses have been proposed to explain a link between childhood vaccinations and autism, including the measles vaccine and a vaccine called thimersosal.

The only study showing any association between autism and the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine was the aforementioned 1998 study, which was not surprisingly funded by lawyers and parents wishing to sue vaccine manufacturers. That was not the only conflict of interest Wakefield did not disclose at the time of publication. The year before the study was published, Wakefield patented a measles vaccine with the potential to replace the combined vaccine that was customarily given.

Despite the small sample size and far-reaching conclusions in Wakefield’s publication, the media vastly publicized it. Vaccination rates dropped substantially as parents were frightened into believing that vaccinating their children put them at severe risk for Autism.

The media has a tendency toward sensationalism, in which it gives exaggerated coverage to insignificant content. “Media exploits vaccine scares firstly to promote fear and pity among their readers which moves media product,” said investigative journalist Brian Deer.

We are still paying the costs to public health of the media’s over-dramatic coverage of the single, fraudulent paper.

Do news media exacerbate the problem?

Posted on November 11, 2014 by Kacie Nelson

By KACIE NELSON

It’s an age-old question: can the news media be blamed for exacerbating an issue? Do the means by which an issue is covered or relayed to the public really affect the way the audience perceives an issue?

The answer is absolutely yes.

Numerous times throughout history, the media covered issues in such a way that caused unnecessary, misguided, and even angry reactions from the public.

When it comes to the “crisis” of Ebola in the United States, that is exactly what occurred.

In early October, the media released that the first case of Ebola had arrived in the United States, carried by a Liberian man named Thomas Duncan who had just returned from a trip to West Africa.

Duncan was hospitalized in Texas, where he died eight days after his diagnosis. While he was being treated, two of the nurses caring for him were infected with the disease, however they were treated successfully and declared safe.

When all of this started happening just over a month ago, every news media website, TV station, radio station, you name it, was reporting about it.

It was everywhere.

Naturally, people took to social media, especially Twitter and Facebook, to spread the news and their feelings of terror. This only made the problem seem worse.

Pretty soon, Ebola was “the new plague” and people across the nation were terrified of catching it and ran the other way as soon as someone coughed or sneezed by them!

This fear was only worsened by the media exacerbating the issue and making it seem like Ebola was an airborne virus that one could catch at any moment, when in fact Ebola can only be transmitted through bodily fluids, blood and objects such as needles.

If the media hadn’t blown the Ebola issue way out of proportion and shared more of the facts with people before alerting everyone to take precautions, it wouldn’t have become such a huge issue.

But never fear! It appears the last known case of Ebola in the United States was just cured last night in NYC and our country is safe once more. That is, until the news media find another disease with which to scare everyone.

Risking our safety to gather news

Posted on October 23, 2014 by Emily Joseph

By EMILY JOSEPH

Journalists have been known to go to great lengths to report breaking news. From standing on the front lines of war to sustaining a hurricane, journalists don’t back down from challenges.

With that being said, when is it enough? Where is the line that can protect them from serious harm?

The recent health crisis of Ebola has once again brought the issue of journalism safety to the forefront. Unfortunately (and ironically) NBC journalists went from just reporting the story to being the story.

Ashoka Mukpo, a freelance photographer for NBC News, was infected with Ebola while working in Liberia with a team of reporters. He was transported back to the U.S. and is thankfully okay, but there are thousands of people who have not been so lucky (predominately in West Africa).

After being pronounced “Ebola free,” Mukpo tweeted “I don’t regret going to Liberia to cover the crisis. That country was a second home to me and I had to help raise the alarm.”

His selflessness and dedication can be seen as honorable or crazy to some. Some people don’t want to put their lives on the line for the news. But others, like Mukpo, find a deeper story. They don’t just want to report, they want to help people.

I’m torn between fully supporting their desires and insisting they see a professional. Yet maybe I’m not at the point in my life or career where I understand their actions. In fact, I one day hope to be so passionate about something that I would “die” for it. Most likely that passion won’t be reporting, but instead my future family. Nevertheless I commend those who want to report on and raise awareness for issues throughout the world.

Ebola virus now threatens U.S.

Posted on October 22, 2014 by Xuanchen Fan

By XUANCHEN FAN

Ebola virus disease (EVD) is transmitted to people from wild animals and spreads in the human population through human-to-human transmission. The first EVD outbreaks occurred in remote villages in Central Africa, near tropical rain forests. Currently, the virus is threatening the United Sates.

On Sept. 30, Dr. Thomas Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), announces the first diagnosed case of Ebola in the United States. Then government officially release the name of the first diagnosed: Thomas Eric Duncan. Unfortunately, Duncan died of Ebola in Dallas on Oct. 8.

Then, on Oct. 10, Nina Pham, a healthcare worker at Texas Presbyterian Hospital tested positive for Ebola. Another nurse, Amber Vinson, who treated Duncan became the third person diagnosed with the virus.

The government has done much to protect citizens from Ebola virus. Since Sept. 29, the U.S. military sent 4,000 troops to West African to establish treatment centers, which are called Expeditionary Medical Support Systems (EMSS).

At the same time, airports in New York, Newark, Chicago, Washington, D.C., and Atlanta are examining certain international passengers for fever. The main target is West African visitors.

Lisa Monaco, assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, sent a brief announcement that “We are not facing just a health crisis –– We are facing a national security priority.”

As for President Obama, he has directly kept sending military to West Africa. The president is personally and actively demanding more troops to fight the disease.

The use of the military increases discontent among citizens.

“We make no apologies for being deliberate about the use of force, particularly when it engages the United States in conflicts in a region like the Middle East,” deputy national security advisor Ben Rhodes told CNN’s “The Situation Room” on Monday. “The American people want a president who is going to think hard before making those decisions who …. makes sure he is drawing from the lessons of Iraq and Afghanistan.”

However, it is interesting that some merchants use the virus situation to sell Ebola productions. For instance, one merchant printed “Ebola” on a handbag and other accessories.

Infographics help tell the story

Posted on October 8, 2014 by Gabriella Shofer

By GABRIELLA SHOFER

News reporting does not just mean providing the facts.

News reporters are responsible for providing factual information about events occurring in the world in an easily comprehensible manner. All too often, news reports complicate the matter further, distorting the public’s perception of the issue at hand.

A particularly relevant example of this is the reporting on the spread of the Ebola virus, that has been covered by the media during the past month. Updates about the disease are continually reported, however, instead of providing information about the disease, many of the articles are written in a way that increases fear in the public about the disease and how it can affect them.

However, a recent notable exception was the The New York Times article that provided more in depth information about the disease, particularly through the use of infographics. Aptly titled, Q & A, the article refutes rumors about the scale of the outbreak of Ebola around the world by using a question and answer format.

The graphic answers the most common questions that are currently being asked about Ebola and provides simplified explanations about the science behind the disease. This format demonstrates the fundamental principle of news reporting in informing the public, rather than providing misleading information that complicates the situation through the use of scientific jargon.

Answers to the questions are further enhanced through the use of graphs, tables, timelines and diagrams, which clarify the situation for the reader. By presenting the facts in this way, The New York Times illustrates the situation in a more clear and concise manner and ensures that readers are informed.

While creating these visual representations of the facts and figures is time consuming, it ultimately provides a more valuable news report for the public while simultaneously foregrounding the publication’s position as a reputable source of information.

Ebola scare hits close to home

Posted on October 5, 2014 by Meaghan McClure

By MEAGHAN McCLURE

As with any troubling issue, it only really starts to shake you once it hits close to home. This was definitely the case with the Ebola coverage in the news media lately.

Ebola had always had a constant presence in the news media – about the outbreaks in Liberia and other faraway African countries, but it was always one of those news stories on the back-burner. The status of the virus was constantly updated, and although it was always concerning, it was never a major concern for the average American.

However, with the first U.S. case reported in Dallas, news coverage is definitely now telling a different story.

All the major news outlets, like CNN for example, have multiple articles about the deadly spreading of the virus on the front pages and home sites. Once we as the public heard about the Dallas case, there were then talks about other possible cases in the Miami airport and in Washington, D.C.

Now, instead of just hearing how the Ebola virus was affecting different countries in a very general way, we are learning about the victims of Ebola, possible Ebola cases, what the virus is, how it spreads, and so forth. Once the first U.S. case bell was rung, the media jumped on the case, making Ebola possibly one of the most news media-covered stories today.

This just shows how one incident, like the Dallas case, can change how the news media covers a certain topic to accommodate and generate public interest. It also shows the closer a story hits home, the more interest the story will have.

Ebola: America’s scariest word

Posted on October 3, 2014 by Autumn Robertson

By AUTUMN ROBERTSON

The Ebola scare has gotten worse than ever and the news media are only adding lumber to the fire.

Saying the word ‘Ebola” around a large group of people might as well be the same as someone saying “Bomb!” in a movie theater. That word evokes so much fear among American citizens more than ever due to the recent discovery of Americans who have recently contacted the disease.

And what’s the news media’s role in this? They find every story about someone who has contacted the disease, write a story highlighting the name of the person, the area that they are from, how many people that they may have become in contact with, and continue to scare people.

People argue that the reporters are just doing their job, but I beg to differ. The news media’s job isn’t to scare people, but to inform people on what the disease is and how they can actually contact it.

As the number of affected Americans continue to rise, more federal health organizations continue to release information on how the disease is spread because large media groups fail to include how getting Ebola can actually happen.

This goes back to a common tactic that journalists use to get readership: sensationalism. If journalists think that more people will be interested in reading about a certain issue, they will amplify the story to get more readership. People love to stay informed, but the easiest way to draw in an audience that wants information is to scare them a little, so they can keep coming back for more.

Today, reporters announced that an Ebola patient is being contained at a hospital on the campus of Howard University in Washington, D.C. I know many students that attend Howard, including my sister. Not only is she scared and worried about contacting the disease, her fellow classmates are feeling the same way.

The media failed to include information to these students on why the person is being contained and the safety precautions that the school will be taking to keep the students safe. The media dropped the news like a bomb and people are scattering around for information.

That is not very fair of the news media, which have a platform that they should use to inform rather than to scare. They should focus on creating more material used to help people than creating a scandalous story.

DIGITAL NEWS REPORTING

Journalism and Media Management Department, School of Communication, University of Miami

Tag Archives: Healthcare-health communication