I'm on a jag about flu.
We'll urge people to get their flu shots, of course. But the question that's always bugged me is, how can 30,000 Americans die a year and I haven't even heard about one, much less known one -- especially after all my years? Now, they're saying 40 percent of us will get, if not be killed by, swine flu.
As I've written before, I regularly challenge the state health department about their reporting of deaths. Last year, they reported that in one month alone, 19 New Mexicans had died from flu and pneumonia complications. I asked: "How many died of flu by itself?" "A couple," they replied. Why lump the numbers together? To make them more compelling?
The CDC says seasonal flu hits the young and the elderly the most. Even the CDC, and the state health department, will admit it's difficult to define the precise cause of death in the very young and the very old, two population groups susceptible to pneumonia, to which flu is just one contributor, but not the only one.
So I raced to the phone several years ago when I ran across a paper by a CDC research published in the New England Journal of Medicine (one of the most respected medical-research journals anywhere). The editors don't publish garbage.
The paper reported on a huge effort by CDC to get health departments in a dozen states to step up their efforts to separate actual flu deaths from all others, then count the number of young people (0 to 18) who actually died of flu. The number was 143. Remember, this is one of two most susceptible age groups.
Extrapolate the numbers anyway you wish. It's nigh impossible to arrive at 30,000 total deaths with such a low rate among one of the two groups most likely to die of seasonal flu.
You watch for it -- the media will dutifully report this fall that more than 30,000 Americans die each year of flu.
KSFR News may say that, as well. We can't disprove it.
But neither can they prove it.
I'll remain healthfully skeptical.
Sunday, July 26, 2009
No hysteria, please
Ambulance chasing, aircraft crashes, swine flu...
We don't do hysteria at KSFR News. At least we try not to. In fact, I think we may go out of way to avoid the news items that seem to want to lead to hysteria.
When the four teens from Santa Fe were killed in a head-on collision. We didn't air the tape of the 911 call.
When the state police helicopter crashed in the mountains above Santa Fe, I thought about asking state police for the taped communications between base and copter. But I chose not to. When other outlets put the audio on their websites, morbid curiosity led me to go there and listen to them (maybe to get a new angle to cover the story?). But KSFR did not air them.
There's enough anguish in the actual fact of those types of events that would not be better served by repeating raw, emotional details -- at least not for us.
So, what about swine flu?
Each year when flu season comes along, I grit my teeth that even talking about it and promoting the fact that the flu shots are ready will add to hysteria. Of course, we'll urge people to get their flu shots. But I'll do it while also asking the question, do 30,000 Americans really did from flu each year? I've never known or heard of one. So, I challenge the state health department about their numbers all the time. Last year, they reported that in one month alone, 19 New Mexicans had died from flu and pneumonia complications. I asked: "How many did of flu by itself?" "A couple," they replied. Why lump the numbers together? To make them more compelling?
Now, we're confronted by not one but two types of flu. Will swine flu be more deadly? The hype makes it sound that way. Who will be more susceptible to it, the young and elderly or somewhere in the middle. The early evidence suggests it will be those somewhere in the middle.
And how many will die? It's always seemed like 30,000 Americans falling to seasonal flu each year is a lot, although I spoke with a statistician recently who says for a population our size, it's not many at all. If it's not many at all, why the hysteria? Many times more people die in auto crashes.
Yes, we'll report about swine flu. I'll even see how the state's emergency preparedness people are getting ready.
I just hope that whatever we report on KSFR News will contribute to education, not to hysteria.
Robin Lustig of BBC news has these thoughts about swine flu on his blog.
We don't do hysteria at KSFR News. At least we try not to. In fact, I think we may go out of way to avoid the news items that seem to want to lead to hysteria.
When the four teens from Santa Fe were killed in a head-on collision. We didn't air the tape of the 911 call.
When the state police helicopter crashed in the mountains above Santa Fe, I thought about asking state police for the taped communications between base and copter. But I chose not to. When other outlets put the audio on their websites, morbid curiosity led me to go there and listen to them (maybe to get a new angle to cover the story?). But KSFR did not air them.
There's enough anguish in the actual fact of those types of events that would not be better served by repeating raw, emotional details -- at least not for us.
So, what about swine flu?
Each year when flu season comes along, I grit my teeth that even talking about it and promoting the fact that the flu shots are ready will add to hysteria. Of course, we'll urge people to get their flu shots. But I'll do it while also asking the question, do 30,000 Americans really did from flu each year? I've never known or heard of one. So, I challenge the state health department about their numbers all the time. Last year, they reported that in one month alone, 19 New Mexicans had died from flu and pneumonia complications. I asked: "How many did of flu by itself?" "A couple," they replied. Why lump the numbers together? To make them more compelling?
Now, we're confronted by not one but two types of flu. Will swine flu be more deadly? The hype makes it sound that way. Who will be more susceptible to it, the young and elderly or somewhere in the middle. The early evidence suggests it will be those somewhere in the middle.
And how many will die? It's always seemed like 30,000 Americans falling to seasonal flu each year is a lot, although I spoke with a statistician recently who says for a population our size, it's not many at all. If it's not many at all, why the hysteria? Many times more people die in auto crashes.
Yes, we'll report about swine flu. I'll even see how the state's emergency preparedness people are getting ready.
I just hope that whatever we report on KSFR News will contribute to education, not to hysteria.
Robin Lustig of BBC news has these thoughts about swine flu on his blog.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
G'bye, Walter
I've read the tributes to Walter Cronkite but they can't surpass my own memories.
As for where news was and is now, Ted Williams of Associated Press sums it up nicely.
"At the end of last year, according to Gallup, 31 percent of Americans considered the Internet to be a daily news source, a 50 percent gain since 2006. That's almost 100 million people actively reaching out to get their news rather than flipping on the TV and waiting for it to come to them.
"Nightly American comfort, Cronkite style, is a thing of the past, if it ever really existed at all. Perhaps, in the Age of Many Voices, comfort and reassurance is not meant to be our lot. Maybe that's just the way it is."
As for where news was and is now, Ted Williams of Associated Press sums it up nicely.
"At the end of last year, according to Gallup, 31 percent of Americans considered the Internet to be a daily news source, a 50 percent gain since 2006. That's almost 100 million people actively reaching out to get their news rather than flipping on the TV and waiting for it to come to them.
"Nightly American comfort, Cronkite style, is a thing of the past, if it ever really existed at all. Perhaps, in the Age of Many Voices, comfort and reassurance is not meant to be our lot. Maybe that's just the way it is."
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Pub radio listeners
Been away for awhile, but a new study caught my attention.
What technologies are public radio listeners using, or drifting to?
The upshot is that more than three-quarters of 30,000 listeners surveyed showed they still like and use the old fashioned radio.
But the study commissioned by the Public Radio Program Directors Association shows some other trends:
-- Listening to streaming radio is growng
-- Cell phones are ubiquitous, and the iPhone is owned by half of them
-- Satellite radio has not made much headway, with only 12 percent saying they have one.
-- Only 3% own an HD radio. As for very likely, somewhat likely or not likely to buy one, they were split almost evenly in thirds.
The point about cell phones and iPhones is an important one and should cause more programmers, especially news directors, to push their audio out to these phones.
What technologies are public radio listeners using, or drifting to?
The upshot is that more than three-quarters of 30,000 listeners surveyed showed they still like and use the old fashioned radio.
But the study commissioned by the Public Radio Program Directors Association shows some other trends:
-- Listening to streaming radio is growng
-- Cell phones are ubiquitous, and the iPhone is owned by half of them
-- Satellite radio has not made much headway, with only 12 percent saying they have one.
-- Only 3% own an HD radio. As for very likely, somewhat likely or not likely to buy one, they were split almost evenly in thirds.
The point about cell phones and iPhones is an important one and should cause more programmers, especially news directors, to push their audio out to these phones.
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Associated Press vs You Tube vs Embedders
First, understand that You Tube allows posters of videos to allow anyone to take those videos and embed them on their own websites. That's part of the user agreement.
You (poster/account holder) hereby grant each user of the YouTube Website a non-exclusive license to access your User Submissions through the Website, and to use, reproduce, distribute, display and perform such User Submissions as permitted through the functionality of the Website and under these Terms of Service. The functionality in the last line is the "embed" code adjacent to each video. If the code is there, another website may use that code (the functionality) to embed the video on their web site.
Ok so far.
Now, Associated Press has gotten miffed at a radio station in Tennessee for embedding codes of Associated Press videos on You Tube on the station's web site.
Here's how PC World covered the story.
And for added emphasis, here's an embedded Associated Press video for you to understand what the content is, where it came from and the functionality (embedded code) of the You Tube posting by AP.
Click twice on the video image to go to the Associated Press pages on You Tube. To the right of the video, you'll see the "embed" code. If it's not there, then they've taken it down. If they've taken it down, you didn't see the video above.
Easy as that to understand.
By contrast, the Reuters You Tube site does not offer an embed code. So there is no way to post their videos directly on another website.
You (poster/account holder) hereby grant each user of the YouTube Website a non-exclusive license to access your User Submissions through the Website, and to use, reproduce, distribute, display and perform such User Submissions as permitted through the functionality of the Website and under these Terms of Service. The functionality in the last line is the "embed" code adjacent to each video. If the code is there, another website may use that code (the functionality) to embed the video on their web site.
Ok so far.
Now, Associated Press has gotten miffed at a radio station in Tennessee for embedding codes of Associated Press videos on You Tube on the station's web site.
Here's how PC World covered the story.
And for added emphasis, here's an embedded Associated Press video for you to understand what the content is, where it came from and the functionality (embedded code) of the You Tube posting by AP.
Click twice on the video image to go to the Associated Press pages on You Tube. To the right of the video, you'll see the "embed" code. If it's not there, then they've taken it down. If they've taken it down, you didn't see the video above.
Easy as that to understand.
By contrast, the Reuters You Tube site does not offer an embed code. So there is no way to post their videos directly on another website.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Media as lobbyists?
Interesting take from Santa Fe County Sheriff Greg Solano on the recent session of New Mexico's legislature.
"So who was successful in getting legislation passed this year? The only lobbyist that don't even have to register as lobbyists in New Mexico, The News Media. In news papers, TV, blogs, and live blogging the press pushed for Live web cams in the legislature, open conference committee meetings, double dipping legislation, and ethics reform. Now don't get me wrong, I sure other people cared about these issues as well, but the news media hounded law makers on these issues relentlessly. Even the death penalty legislation was not hurt by the media stories on the issue."
Should the media be registered as lobbyists?
"...when the legislature listens to the media, when they are lobbying on these issues, are they now beholden to the media?"
This is a fascinating opinion that we'll follow up on with the sheriff.
"So who was successful in getting legislation passed this year? The only lobbyist that don't even have to register as lobbyists in New Mexico, The News Media. In news papers, TV, blogs, and live blogging the press pushed for Live web cams in the legislature, open conference committee meetings, double dipping legislation, and ethics reform. Now don't get me wrong, I sure other people cared about these issues as well, but the news media hounded law makers on these issues relentlessly. Even the death penalty legislation was not hurt by the media stories on the issue."
Should the media be registered as lobbyists?
"...when the legislature listens to the media, when they are lobbying on these issues, are they now beholden to the media?"
This is a fascinating opinion that we'll follow up on with the sheriff.
The CS Monitor is dead. Long live the CS Monitor -- online
After 100 years, the Christian Science Monitor has folded. It's daily print edition is no more. But print will continue in a weekend form -- we suspect for the time being, at least.
The daily Monitor does survive, however, online.
The paper's editor reasons that, "two million individuals now engage with us online each month, about 40 times the number that have been subscribing to the print daily. We are linked deeply and extensively across the Internet. People who never picked up our newspaper read Christian Science Monitor articles online..."
Is there a lesson here for broadcast? Yes, and I hope we pick up on it faster than we're doing now.
With the small amount of time and resources at KSFR's disposal, we're trying to be "more than just radio.
We have done podcasting of audio for years. They're at KSFR.org,
We've found a way past the limitations of our web service provider to do more than put one piece of audio on a news page. (Check out KSFR's You Tube offerings that we post on many of our news pages. Here's a recent one:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recently, we began a breaking-story service on Twitter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unlike the percentage growth of the Monitor's, KSFR's online audience is still puny.
We'll be watching to see if we can grow that audience and succeed at being more than "just radio." If not, what happens when the radio tower lights dim?
The daily Monitor does survive, however, online.
The paper's editor reasons that, "two million individuals now engage with us online each month, about 40 times the number that have been subscribing to the print daily. We are linked deeply and extensively across the Internet. People who never picked up our newspaper read Christian Science Monitor articles online..."
Is there a lesson here for broadcast? Yes, and I hope we pick up on it faster than we're doing now.
With the small amount of time and resources at KSFR's disposal, we're trying to be "more than just radio.
We have done podcasting of audio for years. They're at KSFR.org,
We've found a way past the limitations of our web service provider to do more than put one piece of audio on a news page. (Check out KSFR's You Tube offerings that we post on many of our news pages. Here's a recent one:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recently, we began a breaking-story service on Twitter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unlike the percentage growth of the Monitor's, KSFR's online audience is still puny.
We'll be watching to see if we can grow that audience and succeed at being more than "just radio." If not, what happens when the radio tower lights dim?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
