Howard Kurtz: Media coverage of health care is just fine. Public: No, it isn't.

Blog ››› ››› JAMISON FOSER

Howard Kurtz, the most influential media critic in all the land, thinks media coverage of health care has been just dandy:

Alexandria, Va.: Overall, I think the fabled mainstream media has done a great job covering protests and opinions on both sides of the health-care debate, but they get a D- on presenting an overall, easy to understand what it all means. I've been disappointed that controversy, over detailed analysis wins yet again. Sorry, those multiple Web links to copies of the bill don't help. This should be a major national debate, but overall, the coverage is too much flash and not enough substance.

Howard Kurtz: I'm going to partially disagree. If you look at the major newspapers, and the recent Time cover story, there has been a lot of detailed substance published about almost every aspect of the health care debate: public option, Medicare reimbursement, industry lobbying, end-of-life counseling, you name it. It's out there. It's not hard to find.

As Eric noted earlier, the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence In Journalism found that recent health care coverage has focused overwhelmingly on politics and protests, and 70 percent of Americans say the media has done a fair or poor job of explaining the details of health care proposals.

But Howard Kurtz says the media has done a fine job, so don't worry if the public has mostly seen stories about yelling and screaming, and doesn't think the media have explained the policy details.

Posted In
Health Care, Health Care Reform
The Washington Post, CNN
Howard Kurtz
We've changed our commenting system to Disqus.
Instructions for signing up and claiming your comment history are located here.
Updated rules for commenting are here.