Fake News And Dodgy Reporting

The tricky demands of media monitoring – HFMA is on the case

Theresa Cutts
HFMA Marketing and PR Consultant

As we celebrate the 60th anniversary of the HFMA this year, we find ourselves looking at how the industry has evolved and developed.

As products and ingredients have grown and changed, so has the way messages are communicated in the media. Remember the days when everyone read a physical newspaper? News programmes punctuated our day and the thought of 24-hour rolling news available on a handheld device only happened in sci-fi movies.

In just the last ten years, there have been dramatic changes in how news is curated and consumed, making the job of tracking and responding to features and headlines demanding an ever-evolving approach.

Not long ago you could nurture a relationship with a journalist, there would often be a mutual respect and although there would still be the occasional shock headline, editors would fact-check or look for a second opinion before printing. Today, many reporters and editors will go to whoever is on hand regardless of their knowledge or background in a subject.

For example, a story about the use or benefits of supplementation can have additional comments by those without any real background or training in nutrition with no further searching for a nutritional expert or spokesperson.

We increasingly see press coverage of stories that have little research, lifted straight from a TikTok video that has been put out by anyone from an influencer who has been sent a free bottle of a product, to a GP who this week will talk about getting a flu jab and next week will tell you what vitamins you should or shouldn’t be taking. With headlines along the lines of ‘I’m a Doctor/Expert, these are the supplements that are [insert relevant word] essential/dangerous/must have/avoid, that you should take/avoid every day,’ it’s easy to see why consumers get confused and the industry gets frustrated.

The article often consists of direct quotes from the video and a selection of comments from viewers. No further discussion or investigation by the journalist, no input from other, perhaps more qualified sources. These stories are disposable, short lived and vanish as quickly as they appeared.

How does this impact on our industry and direct our comms activity at the HFMA? Monitoring the news coverage from many sources, mainstream media through to blogs and TikTok, we often find the scaremongering tone of the headline is not repeated in the copy. But it also makes you wonder, with waning attention spans, does the reader look at the article or just digest the headline?

Tracking stories across platforms and subsequent days, we will decide if we need to issue a statement or comment from one of our expert advisors. We will also contact the journalist to offer accurate and impartial of advice. Many writers will have often moved on to the next story as they are not tied to a specialist area. However, there are times when they will reply or even contact us at the start of writing an article.

Faster moving than we could ever have imagined 60 years ago, we will continue to monitor the media in all its forms and all platforms as we look forward to the next 60 years.

More info about the HFMA and membership, www.hfma.co.uk, tel. 0208 481 7100