How journalists should work with scientists in health reporting

By Fredrick Ogenga
Former MA student, HIV/AIDS and the Media Project.

Recently, I was one of the delegates at a 2 day health care media exchange seminar at Hackle Brooke in Craig Park. The exchange was sponsored by Mescheme and co supported by Africa Media assd the media projecte is the level at which scientists and journalists find it difficult to speak the same language about health issues particularly HIV/AIDS.

Often, these two groups of people are suspicious of each other. Kanyi Ndaki a health reporter from IRIN plus news briefly describes it as “mistrust between the scientific community and journalists”. She says journalists find it difficult to deal with people who don’t trust and respect them. She however accepts that yes, journalists have a problem in understanding science. This results in overstating, dumping down statistics and figures.

Although there are several health issues that affect us, one that we cannot escape mentioning is HIV/AIDS. In retrospect, HIV/AIDS in the media has been, time and again, portrayed as a “killer”. Messages on TV, radio, print and other forms of media “scared the audience off”. Rachel Jewekes, director Media Research Council’s Gender and Health Unit and one of the panellists in the exchange, observes a situation where the media focuses in portraying those infected as innocent victims leading to stigmatisation.

The linking of HIV/AIDS to horrible death has made those infected resist rather than accept their status, she says. This encourages denial limiting testing and support for those infected. Jewekes explains that HIV/AIDS reporting has led to the dissemination of harmful myths such as virgin cleansing and rape (the infected raping virgins believing they will be cured of HIV/AIDS) including baby rape. This area of reporting (rape) has been uncritical. There is very little educational component is such reporting.

The idea of baby rape she adds has been repeated several times in the media perpetrating the myth. Journalists should take clear responsibility in what they report. Increasing example of good reporting involves utilistaion of various sources and angles including educational angles and what she calls “social value based journalism” which present ways in which people make real meaning of AIDS in their lives.

Problems in reporting often lie in accuracy in statistics and media accuracy. Journalists should have a critical reflection of their sources of information (mainly scientists). They should be health experts and act as social leaders in HIV/AIDS and other health issues. They should challenge attitudes and values through rigorous fact checking, and searching for underlying issues rather than attention grabbing parts of a story.

Marietje Myburg regional coordinator (communication), Governance and AIDS Program talks about “what journalists need to know from science to enable them tell citizens what they need to know”. This is a situation where journalists hold scientists responsible to give citizens power to know. They should not simplify what is complicated and not complicate what is simple”. Reporting on science requires honesty, she adds. Journalists should ask if they are sure about what they wrote. They should know the extent at which the story accommodates the experience of strangers.

As far as journalism is concerned, this is a tall order indeed. Journalists can try and include all the recommendations discussed above when reporting, particularly on HIV/AIDS. But it does not necessary mean that their reporting will lead to behaviour change. Dr Soul Johnson, managing director of Health Development Africa suggests enforcing certain standards on reporting (by law) and the way advertising present issues of national importance. However, he adds that people’s perceptions of social norms influence how other people behave. HIV/AIDS being a complex issue, a simple media intervention or reporting can hardly address such a complexity.

HIV/AIDS involves issues of gender relations – perceived societal cultural norms and traditions and how to overcome such issues are beyond the ability of a media intervention. Johnson suggests solution hrough ethical standards in reporting by giving a story a human face. In the case of HIV/AIDS then it should have some information on how to cope. Journalists can work with scientists in the science of health if they are expected to be active participants in the process.