Evidence-based journalism: a forlorn hope?

Norman Swan
Med J Aust 2005; 183 (4): . || doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2005.tb06994.x
Published online: 15 August 2005

Media outlets have as much responsibility as ever to maintain standards

One of the roughest stories about medical coverage I’ve heard was from a bacteriologist who told me about the effort he’d made with a local journalist over a particular research story. But to his horror, when the article was published in the newspaper, every time the word “bacterium” should have been used, “virus” appeared instead. Outraged, he rang the journalist who gave him the standard response — that it was the subeditor’s fault. Not giving up, our intrepid researcher rang the subbie who told him “It wasn’t me, it was the editor”. So he called the editor whose response was, “I used journalistic licence. I reckoned our readers knew the word virus better. It doesn’t matter does it?”

  • Norman Swan

  • 1 Correspondence: Dr Norman Swan, The Health Report, ABC Radio National, GPO Box 9994, Sydney, NSW 2001.
  • 2 The Health Report, ABC Radio National, Sydney, NSW.


Competing interests:

I try to earn a living from medical journalism and have made plenty of mistakes.


remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.