Irresponsible reporting
Editorial
Stabroek News
May 1, 2003
Last Sunday’s issue of Kaieteur News (KN) carried a banner headline on its front page proclaiming the discovery of Guyana’s first suspected case of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). Health authorities quickly confirmed that the person was not infected with the deadly disease.
It is a trait of the journalism business that each and every newspaper seeks to be on the cutting edge of the news. Who gets there first usually has a better chance of capturing a larger market. And so every available storyline, particularly those with mass appeal such as the risk of an outbreak of a deadly disease, becomes fair game for one-upmanship. However within the quest to be the first, newspapers have a great responsibility to discharge especially on issues which relate to public health and which if inappropriately handled could lead to public confusion, fear and chaos.
Kaieteur News fell well short of the rigorous pursuit of substantiation of its story moreso in the light of the unease a report about the possible appearance of SARS here could have on the public. It relied on what a private sector physician said without obtaining confirmation from public health authorities that the case it referred to could possibly be SARS. While this confirmation was not absolutely essential, KN would have had to have been absolutely certain about the accuracy of the diagnosis of its private physician. From the case details alone it appeared that the person in question was not SARS infected. The person had travelled from New York - no deaths recorded there and with the outbreak largely contained - and she had a cough and fever. These were not strong indicators on their own of an infection and it was premature to label it as a “suspected” case particularly since public health authorities had not weighed in.
Some of the same information that was reported in KN last Sunday was available to this newspaper last Saturday but after routine checks it was decided that it didn’t warrant a news item.
Members of the public having read the KN news item would have been filled with dread about the disease surfacing here and not knowing what to do to protect themselves and about how the disease is spread and other key issues. There would also have been legitimate concerns about the trail of infectiousness left by this SARS-possible patient and whether it was contained. There would also have been concerns about the capacity of the health ministry and the type of response it was mounting.
But the worst was yet to come. Having wound up the public and fuelled anxiety, the Kaieteur News of the following day carried not a single word about the fate of this suspected SARS case. This is completely unacceptable, irresponsible and warrants an explanation. A follow-up on this suspected SARS case was mandatory if KN was serious about honouring the public trust which newspapers owe to their readers. The SARS story wasn’t one where a follow-up was optional for example a hit and run accident or an armed robbery. A follow up was absolutely essential. Readers who had only purchased KN on the day it had run the SARS story would have been left perched precariously on the edge of the cliff waiting expectantly for an answer to the key question. Did the patient have SARS? Had it not been for Stabroek News and the Guyana Chronicle the following day the public would not have known. It was primarily KN’s responsibility to inform the public of the findings in this case.
Quite frequently KN offends the basic journalistic tenets and one can overlook it on the grounds that its readers are interested in that type of fare. Where however public health/interest issues are involved its lapses cannot be excused as they reflect poorly on all the media and the reader loses faith in the presumed responsibility and integrity of the media houses.
