Health care debate spurs coverage

Shawn McIntosh, Public editor

The health care debate isn’t just filling up the airwaves with pundits and the town hall meetings with concerned citizens.

It’s also filling up my inbox.

Communication to the public editor ebbs and flows from week to week. It jumps when editors make changes to the newspaper. And it spikes whenever proofreaders miss a stupid mistake, like one recent article that said a Civil War battle occurred in 1983.

Lately there’s been a steady increase in the number of calls and e-mails that include questions about various health care proposals, concern and criticism about media coverage, and suggestions for stories the newspaper should tackle.

The comments include a wide range of opinion, from both supporters and opponents of the current health care proposals. They also include a few consistent themes I’ve shared with newsroom editors:

Readers on all sides of the debate resent being painted with a broad brush. They say they are not racists, socialists or pawns of an unseen force that is driving them to line up on one side or the other. They are Americans who care about the future of their country and the future of health care for their families and others. They say the name-calling that has marked the debate just doesn’t help.

From opponents of the Obama plan, I’m hearing they don’t want to be labeled as opponents of health care reform. Many say they are for smart reform that results in real improvements č they just don’t think the Obama plan is the way to get there.

Readers of all political stripes urge us to expose hidden agendas and misstatements.

Many readers, regardless of where they stand, urge the media to avoid getting caught up in covering process and displays put on for TV cameras. They want less flame and more substantive coverage that explores pros and cons, costs and results.

I’m encouraged to hear from readers who are looking to the AJC for specifics to help them sort out the complex debate. That’s a traditional role of newspapers and one we can play better than the TV talk shows or commentary blogs.

AJC editors are making efforts to give readers in print and online the substance they want.

Ajc.com has put together a special channel that includes comparisons of the latest health care proposals, PDF files of the bills, interactives that dissect the proposals, and links to commentary, letters, elected officials and other resources.

Online editor Chris Seward, who is running the channel, said it is designed to help online users filter out some of the noise surrounding the health care debate and drill down for the content that most interests them. The channel launched this week at ajc.com. “The challenge now is to keep it fresh and relevant,” Seward said.

In print, AJC Sunday this week will carry a six-page section that also includes comparison of various proposals, an examination of the costs and other features.

“After watching this debate unfold, it is clear that we need to do more to provide the kind of information people need to understand this very complex issue,” said Bert Roughton, the AJC’s managing editor. “Newspapers in particular have an obligation to get into the details and to present the issues in a useful way, and to empower readers to participate in the debate as fully as they can.”

Roughton said the section will be followed with vigorous, useful ongoing coverage as the debate unfolds.