Diana Kadama
17 July 2011
A cholera outbreak is reported in Kampala, with many patients admitted to Mulago Hospital. The following morning, three major newspapers come out with screaming headlines on the same issue, but each with different figures – 40 in critical condition; 20, while another has 60.
But why do journalists often get it wrong when it comes to figures and statistics, many times giving contradictory, outdated or altered information, or even totally omitting some vital facts, which, in a way trivialises an otherwise important issue, confuses the readers and undermines the credibility of journalists and their respective media houses?
At the 2011 International Health and Development Communication Conference in Nairobi recently, it was noted that many health journalists rely on press releases and media briefings and do not make an effort to verify information.
“For instance, if a press release says 130 cases of cholera patients are admitted to a referral hospital, why can’t a journalist go there and verify by simply doing a headcount?” Assistant professor at Southern Illinois University, School of Journalism, Dr. Uche Onyebaadi, wondered.
Relying on sources entirely without verification can be dangerous, as the journalist can end up publishing distorted information, considering that some sources alter statistics to serve their own interests, by making an incident appear insignificant or more serious, which reflects badly on the media house that publishes such information.
Deborah Mesce, the Population Reference Bureau programme director for international media training, cautioned journalists to be careful when interpreting statistics and emphasised the need to train journalists to use numbers meaningfully.
“Journalists should make a deliberate effort to verify the information provided by their sources. Failure to get facts correct, especially figures, greatly affects the quality of journalistic work, discredits the journalist, the media house and journalism as a profession.”
Mesce emphasised the need to get figures, research reports, statistics and names right, or journalists risk watering down serious issues that impact on the country’s development. She noted that many times there is misrepresentation of statistics, with writers failing to differentiate, for instance, between percentage points and percentages, thus altering information.
Ernest Waititu, the resident journalism adviser, Internews Network advised journalists to look beyond what they are told and take on expansive reporting. “And the only way we can do this is by avoiding over-reliance on press releases, reports and research works, and phone journalism. You need to get out of the newsroom and step in the mud.
A press release or a source only serves as a guideline upon which a journalist should build to get a strong, credible story. Health journalists, in particular, were urged to look beyond breaking news and dig deeper into real issues that affect the ordinary person such as HIV/AIDS, nutrition and maternal health.
Media houses were also urged to train journalists on reporting figures and interpreting statistics. Also emphasised was the need to train investigative health journalists to engage and challenge decision makers, and influence policy in the areas that need serious attention.
Media houses were advised to improve journalists’ welfare to guard against bribes and enable the journalists report ably on health issues.
Like Yusuf Kalyango, a Ugandan professor of journalism at Ohio University put it: “A journalist who eats one meal a day and has to jump over trenches of stinking stagnant water to access his house, may not appreciate the importance of living in a clean environment and feeding well because to him filth and starvation is a normal way of life.”
Journalists, therefore, need to be more vigilant as they collect and disseminate information, if they are to uphold their credibility, the participants agreed.
AllAfrica – All the Time