Reuters Mistakes ACOG Opinion For Entertainment
Same article, same news agency, different titles. Why?
ACOG's committee opinion on elective genital procedures is getting some press attention. (And some very good blog coverage, as well.)
On Medscape, we have this, from Reuters:
ACOG Advises Against Cosmetic Vaginal Surgery
On Yahoo! Health, the same Reuters article becomes:
U.S. gynecology group slams cosmetic vaginal surgery
Did Reuters decide to dumb it down for "the masses" by sensationalizing the title? If that's the case, shame on Reuters. The topic under discussion is complex enough as it is without a pipsqueak media organization having to go out of its way to muddle the waters.
posted by ema @ 3:34 AM
2 comments
![[logo]](http://tbn2.google.com/images?q=tbn:me2GMPeOIa_I_M:http://tcoyp.com/images/squares.gif){kind=small}
Books
2 Comments:
I find that headlines are often sensational or technically inaccurate. For example, recent headlines saying, "Medical abortion is safe" - the study wasn't really about inherent safety, it was about safety compared with surgical abortion. Recent tv news headline on the WV/fetus/sewer story called it an "abandoned" fetus.
Rachel,
Agree, but I must say the Reuters article takes it to the next level. Reuters doesn't even have the excuse of "making a mistake"; it's the same article.
Also, I did read about the "abandoned" fetus on your blog--welcome to the Tissue Police! Most disturbing.
Post a Comment
<< Home