Be honest: when did you really start paying attention to coronavirus coverage? Was it when it first appeared in Wuhan? When the total case number reached 100,000? Or was it when Tom Hanks was infected on set in Australia? Or when John Oliver first started talking about it on Last Week Tonight? The intersection of entertainment media and journalism has become increasingly prominent in recent years. Its legitimacy has come into question multiple times in its various formats, from late night comedy news shows to celebrity entertainers presenting news to large audiences. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, several news media sources turned to entertainment to report on various issues related to the virus. But entertainers are just that: entertainers. Their full-time job is not to study the virus and medicine, it is to entertain. As more and more entertainers took to news media, I became more wary of the platform they’ve been given to speak on the virus, especially when it takes time away from the experts.
Dr. Mehmet Oz, a former cardiac surgeon with a popular show in which he gives medical advice to viewers, said his appearances dramatically increased since the onset of the pandemic. He averages 20 interviews a day, while ratings and viewership for the networks he appears on have increased drastically. He also has become a regular coronavirus contributor for Fox News. However, experts have questioned Oz’s medical expertise on multiple occasions, accusing him of promoting fraudulent products and treatments. Is the increased awareness of coronavirus-related issues worth the price of someone like Oz delivering it?
But Oz’s misinformed comments go past simply encouraging Fox’s viewership to obtain and take the drug. President Trump, an avid consumer of Fox News, is listening to Oz. As Oz’s enthusiasm for the drug increased, so did Trump’s, who now regularly refers to the drug as a “gamechanger.” Many believe that Fox’s coverage of the drug’s possible treatment of coronavirus symptoms is directly responsible for Trump’s enthusiasm. As Trump’s administration continues to push for a drug that does not work, it’s hard to release Oz of the blame for it.
Meanwhile, other celebrities have also taken to communicating with the public about COVID-19 with more positive results. Entertainers from Ashley Tisdale to Arnold Schwarzenegger have urged young people to stay home, which experts say will help flatten the curve and assist hospital resource shortages for those suffering from the virus.
Before the increased attention to the stay-at-home orders, many young people didn’t seem to take the virus seriously. Because of the misconception that young people do not contract or die from the virus, young adults continued to travel and gather in large groups well after it was recommended by medical experts that they stop. Reports of young people taking advantage of cheap flights for getaways littered news media for the month of March. But polls now seem to suggest that people are following social distancing more closely.
Obviously, a stricter adherence to social distancing cannot be completely attributed to celebrities and entertainment, but the celebrity “Stay at Home” campaign likely had somewhat of a positive impact. With scientific facts and data on their side, advocating for social distancing as the best means for “flattening the curve” was the correct thing to do.
I would argue that entertainers bringing in wider audiences on important issues in news media is a good thing, but only when they’re spreading information accurately and keeping people safe. One fundamental difference between the “Stay at Home” celebrities and Dr. Oz is that Dr. Oz claims medical credibility from being a doctor. According to him, his word should be trusted just as much as the experts due to the fact that he used to practice medicine. But experts have questioned his medical reasoning multiple times, and this should give people pause. The celebrities advocating for social distancing, however, do not claim credibility or responsibility. They simply are spreading a message that those with more knowledge on the topic gave to them, rather than drawing their own conclusions and claiming credibility for them like Dr. Oz.
Entertainers have more influence than they might believe. Clearly, the public listens to them, but more importantly, political leaders are listening too. Oz’s intentions may have been good – maybe he wanted to ease anxiety about the coronavirus for the average American, or maybe he wants the economy to start back up as soon as it can. But his words did more harm than good. Promoting a treatment for coronavirus that has no data to back it up is dangerous, especially when the President is listening. It could cause COVID patients to take drugs that hurt them more than they help them.
The question you raise about whether or not the media should be giving such a big platform to entertainers over doctors is a really interesting consideration because on one hand, you obviously have the entertainers such as Dr. Oz who are speaking outside of their qualifications, but when an entertainer speaks correctly about issues, it gives the advice a much larger and more receptive audience, as we as a society are definitely prone to ignoring doctors/following celebrities, so as long as entertainers themselves are listening to the experts I think it can be a really good thing
ReplyDelete