Pulling out headline misleads readers, sensationalizes issue
(Last updated: 06/10/09 7:15pm)While I agree that the article Got protection? Study shows pulling out effective (SN 6/8) featured a topic that was both interesting and appropriate, its title was not.
The full title is surely an attention grabber, yet it offers very misleading information. If one actually reads the full article, which continues onto the second page, he or she discovers that in practice, the withdrawal method has a high degree of user error that continues to make it a problematic preventative measure against pregnancy.
The title doesn’t even say what pulling out is effective against. Pregnancy probably first comes to most minds, but what about sexually transmitted infections? The article states that the withdrawal method does not protect against STIs and the study only tested for effectiveness against pregnancy.
The first title on the front page is the most visible when people glance at the paper. I will bet that not everyone who saw that title read the full article and therefore left with an ambiguous and misleading idea.
Maybe the intent of the title was to encourage those who are using no preventative measures against pregnancy to, at the very least, use withdrawal. But what about those who use condoms only sometimes? Will they now be encouraged to withdraw more often because it has been found to be effective according to The State News?
Hopefully no one is looking to The State News as a trusted source for medical advice, but, unfortunately, sometimes what people hear and see in passing is all they consider when making judgments and decisions.
People, especially those on college campuses, in no way need to be encouraged that the withdrawal method is somehow a good way to prevent pregnancy.
The article, overall, effectively weighed both sides acknowledging that the method could be “better than nothing” and yet it is not recommended as the most effective way to protect against pregnancy. The original study even stated that “withdrawal might not be as effective as other methods.”
Though the article was informative and relevant, a far less suggestive and misleading title should have been chosen for a topic with potentially devastating consequences.
Lia Spaniolo
community, agriculture, recreation and resource studies graduate student
Originally Published: 06/10/09 7:14pm
This has been a HOT topic
06/11/09 4:54pmThat is for sure. The article, letters and blogs. My my lots to read. Much to think about and comprehend, where do I begin and where do I end?
I know reading some of those wonderful blogs will be a beginning…if there is any energy for writers to write more. I love what I learn here.
I plan to do...
06/12/09 10:26amMy own survey. So I can read all the neat letters like the author of this study has gotten to read. But I may end up doing my own reasearach so that I can speak from a pratical point of view.
Steve
06/12/09 11:43am“If one actually reads the full article, which continues onto the second page, he or she discovers that in practice, the withdrawal method has a high degree of user error that continues to make it a problematic preventative measure against pregnancy.”
I would also like to point out the fact that condoms have a high rate of user-error as well, also equal to that of the withdrawl method.
However, I would agree with you in the fact that comparing withdrawal to protection is a gross inaccuracy. The study demonstrates that it is as effective as condoms for preventing pregnancy, however, it provides zero protection from anything else unwanted.
Pulling out sure does...
06/23/09 12:07pmMislead readers. But at least it is better than nothing at all. A person really has to know when to pull out in order to make it work, and even then it can be chancey, because it may not come out on time. Best thing to consider is birth control. Better safe than sorry.