About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

After previously debunking end-of-life falsehoods, ABC and AP portray them as he said/she said

August 13, 2009 8:32 pm ET — 31 Comments

On August 13, ABC's Kate Snow and the Associated Press both characterized the established fact that end-of-life counseling under the House health care reform bill would be voluntary as simply something that President Obama "contends." But both ABC and the AP had previously reported that under the bill, such counseling would indeed be voluntary, and both had previously debunked Sarah Palin's false claim that the provision would create a "death panel."

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

ABC's Snow: Obama "contends" that the "provision is voluntary"

Reporting on Palin's August 12 Facebook post titled "Concerning the 'death panels,' " Snow portrayed the issue as a he said/she said debate, telling viewers that "the president contends the provision is voluntary."

From the August 13 broadcast of ABC's Good Morning America:

SNOW: Sarah Palin is taking on President Obama in the battle over health care. In a new Facebook posting, the former governor says the president is, quote, making light of concerns about a provision in the House bill that would pay doctors for consulting with patients about end-of-life care. Palin says because of pressure to reduce health care spending, it's no wonder some might view those consultations as a way to minimize end-of-life care. But the president contends the provision is voluntary, and no one will force a senior to make choices based on cost.

Just one hour earlier: ABC's Johnson reported that the provision is "entirely voluntary"

ABC medical editor earlier explained that provision makes end-of-life counseling "entirely voluntary." Less than an hour before Snow portrayed the fact that end-of-life counseling would be voluntary as simply Obama's argument, ABC chief medical editor Dr. Tim Johnson told anchor Chris Cuomo that "the idea about death panels -- that this plan is going to decide who lives and dies" is "not at all legitimate." Johnson continued, "What is in one of the versions is a so-called advanced care planning provision, allowing patients who want it -- entirely voluntary -- to have a consultation with their health care professionals every five years to talk about directives and living wills and things like that that might help them plan for the future as they're getting older." He added, "But I stress, it's entirely voluntary. It's not at all mandatory."

Johnson also stated:

JOHNSON: Now, most polling shows that seniors want this desperately from their doctors, and yet only very few get it. So this will help, because it will pay doctors and others to take the time, make the effort to do it. So I think when seniors really find out what this is really about, they're gonna welcome it. Nobody wants to end up in the ICU with tubes sticking out of them, simply prolonging death. And I think this provision will help that a lot.

Cuomo then asked, "So the choice that you make is not tied to what kind of money you get from insurance?" to which Johnson responded, "Not at all."

Snow herself has previously called "death panel" claim "misinformation"

Snow on World News: "The facts? The provision would create no such panel"; "death panel" claim is "misinformation."

SNOW: At issue, a 10-page section of a thousand-page House health care reform bill. It would reimburse a doctor for talking with a patient every five years about what kind of care they want near the end of life. Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin called this "downright evil," asserting her parents and her child with Down syndrome would have to stand in front of an Obama death panel so his bureaucrats can decide whether they're worthy of health care.

The facts? The provision would create no such panel. It calls only for a consultation between the individual and a practitioner. So how did this misinformation start? [ABC's World News, 8/10/09]

Snow on ABCNews.com: "Health Care 'Death Panels' a Myth." Snow wrote a virtually identical report for an August 10 ABCNews.com article, featuring the headline "Health Care 'Death Panels' a Myth" and the subheadline "Claims That House Health Care Reform Bill Would Create 'Death Panels' Are Untrue."

AP: "Obama contends" provision "would only authorize Medicare to pay doctors for counseling patients about end-of-life care if they want it"

From the August 13 AP article:

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin claims President Barack Obama is making light of concerns over what she has called "death panels" determining or denying care in the Democratic health care proposal.

Palin makes the claim in a Facebook posting Wednesday evening.

Obama on Tuesday said the Democratic health care legislation would not create "death panels" to deny care to frail seniors -- or "basically pull the plug on grandma because we decided that it's too expensive to let her live anymore," as the president put it.

Rather, Obama contends the provision that led to such talk would only authorize Medicare to pay doctors for counseling patients about end-of-life care if they want it.

But Palin, the former Republican vice presidential candidate, says the provision reads otherwise and will lead to health care rationing.

AP itself has previously reported counseling provision is voluntary

AP itself has reported "provision ... authorize[s] Medicare to pay doctors for counseling patients about end-of-life care, if the patient wishes." In an August 11 article titled "FACT CHECK: No 'death panel' in health care bill," the AP reported, "Nothing in the legislation would carry out such a bleak vision. The provision that has caused the uproar would instead authorize Medicare to pay doctors for counseling patients about end-of-life care, if the patient wishes" [emphasis added].

AP itself has reported that "Palin and other critics are wrong" about "death panel." In its fact check, the AP also reported that "Palin says the health care overhaul bill would set up a 'death panel.' Federal bureaucrats would play God, ruling on whether ailing seniors are worth enough to society to deserve life-sustaining medical care. Palin and other critics are wrong."

From the AP's August 11 fact-check article:

Former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin says the health care overhaul bill would set up a "death panel." Federal bureaucrats would play God, ruling on whether ailing seniors are worth enough to society to deserve life-sustaining medical care. Palin and other critics are wrong.

Nothing in the legislation would carry out such a bleak vision. The provision that has caused the uproar would instead authorize Medicare to pay doctors for counseling patients about end-of-life care, if the patient wishes. Here are some questions and answers on the controversy:

[...]

Q: Is anything required?

Monsignor Charles Fahey, 76, a Catholic priest who is chairman of the board of the National Council on Aging, a nonprofit service and advocacy group, says no.

"We have to make decisions that are deliberative about our health care at every moment," Fahey said. "What I have said is that if I cannot say another prayer, if I cannot give or get another hug, and if I cannot have another martini - then let me go."

End-of-life care counseling provision would, in fact, be voluntary

Provision calls for Medicare to cover voluntary end-of-life counseling sessions. Section 1233 of America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 -- the provision Palin cited -- amends the Social Security Act to ensure that advance care planning will be covered if a patient requests it from a qualified care provider [America's Affordable Health Choices Act, Sec. 1233]. According to an analysis of the bill produced by the three relevant House committees, the section "[p]rovides coverage for consultation between enrollees and practitioners to discuss orders for life-sustaining treatment. Instructs CMS to modify 'Medicare & You' handbook to incorporate information on end-of-life planning resources and to incorporate measures on advance care planning into the physician's quality reporting initiative." [waysandmeans.house.gov, accessed 8/13/09]

By ignoring previously reported facts, ABC, AP continue media pattern of advancing "death panel" claims

Numerous media conservatives have advanced myth that provision mandates counseling that would pressure seniors to die. On July 16, former New York Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey falsely claimed that the House health care reform bill would "absolutely require" end-of-life counseling for seniors "that will tell them how to end their life sooner." Since then, numerous media figures -- including Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, and Rush Limbaugh -- have repeated versions of McCaughey's claim, in some cases even after the falsehood was debunked and McCaughey herself backtracked.

Fox News personalities have advanced Palin's "death panel" claim. Although the claim has been repeatedly and widely debunked, Fox News anchors, hosts, and contributors, including Newt Gingrich, Michelle Malkin, Brian Kilmeade, Glenn Beck, Andrew Napolitano, Bret Baier, and Shannon Bream have adopted Palin's "death panel" term or have advanced or expressed support for her assertion.

Politico uncritically referenced Palin's "death panel" claim. In an August 10 Politico article, Andy Barr reported "Palin's claim last week that the Democratic health care plan is 'evil' and would create a 'death panel' to decide the fate of children like her youngest son, Trig, who has Down syndrome," without noting that her claim is false.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by nerzog (August 13, 2009 9:02 pm ET)
      7  
      This is just irresponsible, if not downright corrupt. They know the truth...why not report it?


      This reluctance to point out what is factual has been the News Media's greatest failing over the past decade. That is why the Republicans get away with this garbage.

      Coming down on the side of truth is not bias.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by eweston8542983 (August 13, 2009 9:57 pm ET)
        6  
        Because it works apparently. This provision has been dropped from the senate bill.
        Ignorance and fear win again. D*mm*t!
        Report Abuse
        • Author by nerzog (August 14, 2009 8:41 am ET)
          3 1
          They usually do, if you look back through history. That's because ignorance and fear require little effort, and fearful, uninformed people are easily manipulated.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by angryofmayfair61 (August 14, 2009 1:50 pm ET)
            1 4
            you are not kidding about your last comment. How the heck did Obama manage 53% of the population to vote for him. You are right-people are easily manipulated by ACORN,SEIU,Apollo and Tides foundation.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by NewBee (August 14, 2009 6:33 pm ET)
              3 1
              How the heck did Obama manage 53% of the population to vote for him.
              He has the best ideas. Simple as that. If it weren't for racism, he would have had an even larger majority.
              Report Abuse
            • Author by ForTheLoveOfEllipsis... (August 16, 2009 1:03 pm ET)
                 
              Oh, boy, here we go again:

              (deep breath)

              ACORN's COMING!!!!!!!!!! WE'RE ALL GONNA DDDDDDDDDDIIIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!

              This is starting to get tough on my voice... ;o)
              Report Abuse
      • Author by carlileb5935 (August 13, 2009 11:16 pm ET)
        3  
        "This reluctance to point out what is factual has been the News Media's greatest failing over the past decade. "

        Failing = deliberate
        Report Abuse
        • Author by MickD (August 14, 2009 9:23 am ET)
          3  
          Under the guise of false equivalencies, the MSM have been able to satisfy the corporate master and their "justified" stratospheric salaries.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by mari2jj2970 (August 14, 2009 1:16 am ET)
        1  
        Ummm both corrupt and irresponsible. If it comes out of these guys mouth's, you can bet it is both. Sad to say, many in my own party cannot abide the idea that osme Democrats could join us here on this discussion in order for them to be able to hear official corrections that still occur on the latest site the folks at media matters have that corrects misinformation.
        We can always count on them to post anyting that helps pass this health care package. If we can get this first part operational so opinions can be posted, that will be a giant leap forward. Thanks for taking on this job and for seeing it through till it has been settled. Getting this stimulus money out means jobs can be saved!
        Report Abuse
      • Author by rrastro (August 14, 2009 7:54 pm ET)
          3
        the side of truth is bad enough. requiring doctors to give legal advice about matters their patients may not wish to hear and a panel authorised to decide a procedure has too little cost vs benefit is scary enough and that comes from the bill and obama
        Report Abuse
        • Author by ForTheLoveOfEllipsis... (August 16, 2009 1:05 pm ET)
             
          the side of truth is bad enough. requiring doctors to give legal advice about matters their patients may not wish to hear and a panel authorised to decide a procedure has too little cost vs benefit is scary enough and that comes from the bill and obama

          No, rravinglunatic, what you meant say was:

          "All that garbage I just spewed comes from FreedumbWurks and the voices in my own head"...
          Report Abuse
    • Author by sugar1422 (August 13, 2009 10:59 pm ET)
         
      Until the news media, in general, grow a "set of balls" and begins to just state facts people like Beck, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Palin & others will continue to spread HATE. This is what they count on to make their millions.

      Limbaugh & Palin are for "living wills" and then against them? HMMMM....

      My mother had an advance directive and she passed away in August 1996. She had control of her life even in the last months and days. I too have an advance directive (living will). For over 20 years the government and medical professionals have promoted advance directives. Where were these "so called" concerned citizens then??
      Report Abuse
    • Author by jct405 (August 14, 2009 8:20 am ET)
      2  
      The NY Times today (Friday) reported the origin of the "Death Panel" rumors almost as if it were some quasi-legitimate event.

      The NY Times, in fact, appears to credit Republican Senator Charles Grassley with removing 'end of life' provisions from legislative proposals. Right, Grassley the clear-eyed saint.

      Betsy McCaughey, whose blatant fabrication of the 'death panel' malarkey, the Times treats as a sort of a normal political operative.

      The facts are a matter of record. McCaughey created the 'death panel' rumor by deliberate misrepresentation. Grassley and other elected officials, fully aware of the lie, used it to their ends and continued and strengthened it.

      Is the mainstream media shy about reporting the really ugly underbelly of the misinformation beast? Apparently.

      The NY Times is no longer my home page.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by markbfoot199 (August 14, 2009 9:42 am ET)
      1 5
      So how do you to take something out of a bill that was never there?

      http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090813/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_end_of_life_2
      Report Abuse
    • Author by only_myschly3567 (August 14, 2009 10:46 am ET)
      1  
      When we complained about the coverage ramping up the Iraq War, it wasn't that every voice against the President was treated as equal, it was that FACTS and TRUTH weren't important. We've still got the same beef with you media! It's about FACTS, and the TRUTH.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by eb (August 14, 2009 11:23 am ET)
        2  
        Exactly, there was no effort to explore the entire spectrum of possibilities in the media befor the war. Even former Iraqi weapons inspectors were ignored. Saying that Saddam was not a WMD threat made you some kind of an upatriotic freak.

        Remember war protesters motives were questioned and they were considered "disruptive" to any potential military activities.
        Back then many of these same "tea bag patriots" had no symphathy for those who spoke out against our running off a foreign policy cliff. To this day it seems that all the pundits like O'reily, beck, limbauh, hannity have gotton a free pass for being completely wrong and contemptious of those speaking the truth about the war.

        Meanwhile their distortions continue and we are not getting a productive, rational debate on health care. Worse still the hypocracy continues. These tea baggers seem to wallow in their victimhood as if they are the only ones who have been smeared for speaking out. "liberal" is now associated with all kinds of horrible things because of our distorted media and the pundits they enable. They can dish it but they can't take it... typical....
        Report Abuse
    • Author by angryofmayfair61 (August 14, 2009 12:55 pm ET)
        6
      I guess BHO made a tactical mistake in appointing Ezekiel Emanuel- Special Health Adviser to Director, Office of Management and Budget (since February 2009)

      When implemented, the Complete Lives System produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated… The Complete Lives System justifies preference to younger people because of priority to the worst-off rather than instrumental value.” — January 2009
      Report Abuse
      • Author by NewBee (August 14, 2009 6:34 pm ET)
        2  
        Try to get any insurance company to approve a heart transplant for a 95-year old person and get back to us.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by National_Insecurity (August 15, 2009 12:16 am ET)
           
        So there's only one health ethicist on the planet, huh? Only in your imagination.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by starkcr31 (August 14, 2009 1:53 pm ET)
        3
      It's not the counseling that constitutes "death panels", it's the rationing of care, which will happen. If you want a sneak preview of what's to come with Obama-care, look at Oregon or some of the other states that currently have government-run health care. They deny drugs and treatment to people when it doesn't seem cost-effective to give it to them, i.e., if they have terminal cancer and a drug might ease their suffering. Well, they're going to die anyway so what's the point?!? That's just a stupid waste of money right? That's a death panel.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by congero6189599 (August 14, 2009 3:26 pm ET)
        3  
        So starkcr31 you 'd rather have this situation continue? http://sickforprofit.com/
        Report Abuse
      • Author by jhlegette8658 (August 14, 2009 5:47 pm ET)
        3  
        I lived in Oregon and never heard of anything like that. I also hope since you don't like social programs that you never use Medicare, Medicaid, Public libraries, or Public schools.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by ForTheLoveOfEllipsis... (August 16, 2009 1:12 pm ET)
             
          Of course you haven't; starkravingcrazy's referring to the Bizarro World between his ears. And add to that list public roads, police departments, fire departments, public parks, etc....
          Report Abuse
      • Author by NewBee (August 14, 2009 6:35 pm ET)
        1  
        Oh. So you are pushing that debunked myth on this thread as well? Good luck with that.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by ForTheLoveOfEllipsis... (August 16, 2009 1:10 pm ET)
           
        No, starkravingcrazy31, that's a miasma of BS cooked up by the voices on the radio and in your head. Especially since NO STATE(pardon my shouting, but this repetitive-motion BS is getting on my nerves) has government-run healthcare. Care to post a few links, or should we just pretend that what's oozing out of your keyboard is something other than your own paranoid schizophrenia?...
        Report Abuse
    • Author by congero6189599 (August 14, 2009 3:19 pm ET)
      3  
      So Stark are you saying that insurance companies don't ration care? What about when an insurance company tells you that your med is not covered, or a procedure not authorized. What about if you have a hernia but no insurance and the hospital wants a down payment on the operation but you just lost your job?
      Are you aware of Medicare and Medicaid or government run healthcare programs? Are you aware that 18,000 people die each year due to lack of insurance? Are you aware that a large part of those who declare bankruptcy are due to hospital bills? Are you aware that 14,000 people per day lose their health insurance? Are you aware that we rank 37th in the world in quality of care yet pay more than many industrialized countries for our care? Are you aware that the present pace of the cost of healthcare will bankrupt this country? Do you understand that we need change that the present situation is not sustainable?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by congero6189599 (August 14, 2009 3:23 pm ET)
        3  
        Do you understand that insurance companies deny coverage if you have a pre-existing conditions? Do you understand tyhat insurance companies make profits by limiting what they pay for? I find it very curious you'd rather have a CEO of the insurance company decide what procedure or med you get rather than you and your doctor.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by National_Insecurity (August 15, 2009 12:18 am ET)
          1  
          Rescission (denial of coverage) also is applied for specious reasons with current insurance "medical loss models." My wife had a false positive 20 years ago, and she still can't get coverage.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by latichever (August 14, 2009 6:34 pm ET)
      3  
      As Mencken said, "People get the government they deserve," and if there is no health care reform, Mencken added, "And they deserve it good and hard."
      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.