Let’s Swap the Scare Stories for Truth and Transparency

Let’s Swap the Scare Stories for Truth and Transparency

Love him or hate him, you can’t deny that professional contrarian John Stossel tends to make valid points about how ridiculous much of what we consider to be conventional wisdom. As the author of “Myths, Lies, and Downright Stupidity: Get Out the Shovel — Why Everything You Know is Wrong” and as an ABC News correspondent, Stossel gets to mine society’s foibles and debunk much of what he feels is unnecessary alarmism. At the annual FASA meeting held in April, Stossel delivered the talk, “Truth & Transparency: Can the Media Help ASCs Get the Message Out?” which, while entertaining in a way that only Stossel can be (including inverting the letters ACS every time he meant to say ASC) was thought-provoking.

As a Libertarian, Stossel thumbs his nose at both red and blue, and instead tweaks the noses of those who don’t believe that competition is good for America. During his presentation Stossel advocated for and enumerated the benefits of increased self-regulation in the United States, noting that self-regulation “protects us better” even as it “increases market competition.” Stossel commented, “Competition solves problems and forces entities to serve their customers,” which, as we know all too well in healthcare, is the crux of any enterprise in the free market. Stossel noted that the U.S. has a plethora of government agencies, such as the Food and Drug Administration, to protect us from ourselves, but asked, “Does protecting us from the bad protect us from the good?” Stossel explained that because of the thalidomide debacle, the FDA now demands at least 15 years of drug trials, and he calls this a “bias against innovation.” He mused that although the FDA won’t ever go away, but if the monopoly is eliminated, couldn’t alternatives appear? And that, Stossel said, was the start of freedom of choice, as other entities could bring drugs to market faster and cheaper, and provide desperate individuals with increased hope for treatment.

Lest these seem like random points, Stossel indicated that they were examples of “something being off in the public debate” and pointed to a media that loved to inflict “scare stories” on consumers. And the media’s biggest bogeyman? According to Stossel, it’s the misunderstood statistic; after all, he noted, journalists don’t understand them and readers don’t like thinking hard enough to make sense of them on their own. For example, Stossel said there are more deaths related to driving than plane crashes in the U.S. annually, but it’s not news because it happens all of the time. Stossel observed, “There are more scare stories than ever before, but if things are so bad, where are the bodies?” Well, you could point very easily to places like Virginia Tech, but stories like this are fraught with journalistic minefields. Several days after the shootings, syndicated talk show host Glenn Beck commented that it might be time for the media to stop sensationalizing the news, to stop treating every news event as the end-all and be-all of the moment, and to take some responsibility for the dust kicked up and breathed in by gullible viewers who are less able to discern the real news from hype and inflammatory commentary. In a 24/7 era of endless posturing by pundits and talking heads, that’s quite a challenge.

Stossel expounded upon this very issue in a recent op-ed piece, “Worry About the Right Things.” He commented, “We do it because we get caught up in the excitement of the story. And for ratings … Newsrooms are full of English majors who acknowledge that they are not good at math, but still rush to make confident pronouncements about a global-warming “crisis” and the coming of bird flu. Bird flu was called the No. 1 threat to the world. But bird flu has killed no one in America, while regular flu — the boring kind — kills tens of thousands … Media exposure clouds our judgment about real-life odds. Of course, it doesn’t help that viewers are as ignorant about probability as reporters are … So take our reporting with heavy skepticism. Ignore us when we hyperventilate about mad cow disease and the danger of asbestos hidden behind a wall.” And in the essay, “The Media Likes Scaring Us, and We Like It,” Stossel commented, “I’m embarrassed by my profession. We consumer reporters should warn you about life’s important risks, but instead, we mislead you about dubious risks … The media should be skeptical of their prophesies of doom, but we rarely are … My TV program, “20/20,” has done frightening reports on the dangers of paper shredders, soccer goals, lawn chemicals, cell phones, garage-door openers, and more. There’s always some truth behind the scares — someone got hurt, or some study somewhere found a risk. But we rarely put the danger in perspective. We give you a breathless rush of alarm over every possibility, often delivered with a throbbing rock beat.”

So what is the message for the ASC industry in all of this? We must continue to counter the scare stories that our detractors are telling patients and lawmakers! As Stossel noted, “Passion and truth will win in the public debate, but you must participate.”

Until next month, 

Kelly M. Pyrek 
Group Editor, Medical Division 
kpyrek@vpico.com