Much healthcare coverage ignores Everyman’s needs

Newspaper coverage of healthcare reform, at least at the Washington Post, tends to treat the issue like a horse race or boxing match, focusing on the conflict and the day-to-day leaders, says the Washington Post's ombudsman, Andrew Alexander.

On top of that, the coverage assume that readers already possess some knowledge about the issue, which isn't always the case, Alexander says:

Many have said that Post stories routinely assume a foundation of knowledge that they simply don't have. Some said that they don't understand basic terms like "public option" or "single payer." They want primers, not prognostications. And they're craving stories on what it means for ordinary folks and their families.

Focusing on the conflict instead of on the useful facts tacitly lets the rhetoric take over the news coverage, he says. "By 'gravitating toward controversies' such as the recent boisterous town hall meetings on health care ... the media may 'unwittingly' be allowing coverage to be shaped by evocative rhetoric and images."

This column is a good reminder to all journalists that it's readers who matter most, not the people who are subjects in our stories. Journalism is best when it provides people with information they can use to make their lives better.

Focusing on conflict can be a good thing, but conflict itself should not the point of any story. Conflicts should instead be where we begin discussion about solutions and lessons. Making a spectacle of conflict just to sell papers is tawdry, and it should be beneath proper journalists.

Related posts:

1. Pat Thornton: Journalism needs to get down and dirty
2. New healthcare-related meme just as pointless as all the rest
3. Better donate, or coverage will be left to the bloggers
4. Langeveld: Newspaper downturn caused by shift in American interests, not by Web