New website is no miracle cure

Melissa A Sweet
Med J Aust 2005; 183 (4): . || doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2005.tb06993.x
Published online: 15 August 2005

Taking on two global Goliaths

Cheers and groans. Those were my conflicting reactions during a recent perusal of the media doctor website. I cheered in admiration at a good idea and at the temerity of the project’s instigators in taking on two global Goliaths — the media and the medical industries. It is an ambitious task for a project run largely by volunteers on a limited budget. I cheered to see media coverage recognised as a public health issue meriting attention and intervention. It was also pleasing to see a systematic attempt to counter the effective public relations campaigns of commercial, professional and other vested interests in the health sector. Clearly the media and its audiences could do with some help in developing better critical appraisal skills when it comes to health and medical claims. And it is a point well made that responsibility for media coverage must also be borne by medical journals, health professionals, researchers and others who provide information to journalists.

  • Sweet Communication, NSW


  • 1. Smith DE, Wilson AJ, Henry DA. Monitoring the quality of medical news reporting: early experience with media doctor. Med J Aust 2005; 183: 190-193. <eMJA full text>


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.