Saturday, September 11, 2010

NPR Admits Circumcision Interview Not Balanced

Your voices are being heard.

After receiving hundreds of complaints via email, letter, and phone call, NPR responds to the critique of their 4 minute circumcision bit on Weekend All Things Considered, during which a very pro-cutting, Diekema, was interviewed and filled NPR airwaves with a regurgitation of myths and misconception surrounding infant circumcision. True, NPR admits - it was not a "balanced" report. And this admittance is coming after your letters, comments, calls.

Every action you take - even sending one email today, or making one article comment tomorrow - can and does make a difference. Not only for the next parent who comes along seeking additional information, who reads your words and clicks your links - but also for the public voice speaking up on behalf of the basic human right to genital integrity for all human beings, male and female, of any age.

It takes a collective effort to bring about social change, and few things are more deserving of our attention right now, at this moment in U.S. history, than the non-medical cutting up of our newborn babies' penises. Thankfully, this number has decreased to less than 1/3 of all boys born on U.S. soil, and continues to fall as parents become fully informed before their baby's birth - but we cannot risk remaining silent until this rate touches down at zero.


"All truth goes through three steps:
First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed.
Finally, it is accepted as self-evident."

~Arthur Schopenhauer
(German philosopher, 1788-1860)



Interview about Circumcision: Not the Whole Story
NPR Ombudsman with Alicia Shepard

Less than two months ago, Ronald Goldman called to complain that NPR "always" adopts a pro-male circumcision stance in its coverage.

The words "NPR always" or "NPR never" always give me pause. It's far more helpful and credible to provide specific examples, rather than offering vague impressions, particularly concerning a subject one feels strongly about.

I thanked Goldman and suggested he contact me again when he found a case in point.

It didn’t take long.

Goldman is director of the Boston Circumcision Resource Center, which advocates against circumcising males, arguing there are no health benefits, it's painful, and it causes medical and psychological harm.

On Aug. 22, NPR’s Weekend All Things Considered ran a story showing circumcision rates are falling fast in the United States. It was based on an Aug. 5, federal research report that hospital circumcision rates had dropped from 56 percent in 2006 to less than 33 percent in 2009.

To cover the story, Weekend All Things Considered decided to have substitute host Audie Cornish interview Dr. Douglas Diekema, a pediatrics bioethicist at the University of Washington.

“When the news came out about this startling drop in circumcisions, our intention was to find someone who wasn’t a partisan—someone who could present both sides,” said Rick Holter,” the top editor on the weekend show. “So we decided to go with a bioethicist. And that’s how we settled on Dr. Diekema.”

Diekema, however, on air did not turn out to be the non-partisan they intended.

When Cornish asked him why people opposed circumcision, Diekema replied:

"Their arguments are largely emotional. I mean, just the fact that they insist on referring to this as genital mutilation tells you that they’re refusing to recognize whether there may be any medical benefit to the procedure. Their use of that term is intentional. I think they’re trying to make a point that if it's wrong on girls, it’s wrong on boys. But there are some significant differences with boys - the most important of which is that there are, in fact, some medical benefits to circumcision."

The story prompted phone calls, emails and 253 comments on npr.org.

The debate —and there clearly is one — centers on two strongly differing beliefs about whether circumcision for a baby boy is medically necessary. One side believes that circumcision prevents disease and promotes cleanliness. The other believes that disease prevention is a red herring that is used to perpetuate a social custom and that the lack of circumcision does not lead to disease.

Listeners did not get both sides of the controversy in this NPR interview.

Diekema also incorrectly said that circumcision opponents regularly use the term "genital mutilation" when referring to the practice. Goldman's website lists over a dozen links about circumcision, but not one uses the term "genital mutilation," a term more commonly used for what is done to young girls, particularly in some cultures.

“There’s no balance to this report,” said Goldman. “There are plenty of reputable people who can fill in the blanks which Dr. Diekema continues to ignore. I would hope in future stories, NPR would include a perspective to describe the harm. Europeans think we are crazy [for circumcising babies] and they don’t have any particular health problems [with all their men remaining intact]. The U.S. is the only country in the world that circumcises to the degree that we do for non-religious reasons.”

NPR editor Holter said Cornish spoke with Diekema for 20 minutes, but the final taped interview was pared down for time reasons.

“Diekema actually did an okay job of presenting both sides during the 20 minutes or so Audie talked to him,” said Holter, “but we didn’t cut [edit] it in as balanced a way as we could and should have in the four minutes we had allotted for the story. Also, it became clear that he had a definite opinion and we probably should’ve either cut it differently or sought another voice.”

Either option would have been preferable and provided more balance and context.

There was another problem as well. Circumcision opponents are sometimes referred to as "intactivists." Cornish mentioned this and both she (mostly) and Diekema giggled at the reference, which furthered the perception that NPR may think opposition to this medical procedure is silly.

Male circumcision has always been controversial, and that places an extra burden on NPR to treat the subject fairly and give equal weight to both sides. NPR could remedy what this story failed to do by posting Diekema’s full interview, or letting a circumcision opponent write an essay for the Opinion Page that NPR could link to the original story.

View NPR Ombudsman original here.

11 comments:

  1. This is so good to hear! It's about time there's some responsibility in the media for the disturbing amount of pro-MGM propaganda.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Something's seriously wrong at the American Academy of Pediatrics. First they let Schoen elbow his way onto an earlier 'cicumcision taskforce' with disasterous consequences for American boys and now Diekema is on there with a platform to promote his blatantly pro-circumcision agenda. Some bioethicist!!! What a sick joke!!!

    Hey AAP, take a look at what's happening and what's not happening across the Atlantic in Europe. Seriously, go and have a look! HIV/AIDS is lower, men aren't dropping dead from penile cancer and women aren't dropping dead from cervical cancer. Baby boys aren't suffering the horrible effects of UTIs. At the same time, baby boys aren't being sexually violated and damaged and dying from unnecessary and unethical surgery.

    Diekema MUST immediately step down from his position on the Taskforce on Circumcision and cease referring to himself as a bioethicist. He clearly has no understanding of ethical practice in medicine.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I submitted the following to their suggestion box here: http://help.npr.org/npr/includes/customer/npr/custforms/contactus.aspx under Submit a story idea for "all things considered" and again for "Fresh Air".

    " I appreciate the fact that NPR has acknowledged their unfortunate one sidedness in their interview with Dr. Diekema on circumcision. HOWEVER. The damage done was done on air. If you want to gain back my listener-ship and financial support, as well as many others highly offended and disillusioned by what was done, then your admission needs to be done on air as well. You're on the right path, but what needs to happen is a story on intactivists. (a professional story - no laughing) You don't have to agree, hell, bring back that circumcised doctor who's main goal in life is to violate every man's right to his body, but TELL PEOPLE that there is a movement happening. TELL THEM WHY. ON AIR. If you think we're small potatoes, then you're just not looking. It's not just parents opting out. It sure as hell isn't just the hispanic population. It's bloggers, and protesters, and family fights, and baby fairs, and videos http://www.youtube.com/user/whatUneverknew?feature=mhum#p/u/1/ZNlPvJySLjg and advertising on grassroots donations, and lawsuits, and happy grateful sons, and men dedicating two years or more of every day effort to manually restore what was stolen from them. We are waking up to this human rights abuse as a nation and it WILL END. Your job is to talk about what's happening, yes?"

    ReplyDelete
  4. How on earth can Diekema call himself a "bioethicist" and say the things he did, and act the way he has acted? It is an outrage. Imagine someone laughing off the GM of infant girls... and what is ethical about the sexist discrimination in who we cut apart?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have news for you, I believe Diekema was involved in the proposal that minor female genital cutting be allowed in the USA.

      Delete
  5. I just figured out why the AAP even has a bioethicist on call. It's to keep tabs on how far past the line of common decency they can shift prevailing practices.

    An ethicist isn't defined as someone who PROMOTES ethical behavior; he just "studies" it to help the AAP keep the cash registers ringing as much as possible.

    ReplyDelete
  6. How many of these nutcases are on the AAP? We have many obstetricians who rape baby boys with circumcision here in Massachusetts. What's their organization say?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Interesting point, Ron. Someone who laughs at a movement against cutting children's genitals is certainly not ethical by nature. His reaction is perhaps a reflection of increased traction by the genital autonomy movement (reminded of Schopenhauer's 'first it is ridiculed...' quote).

    ReplyDelete
  8. All the "circumcision task force" does is act like a pacifier. Their job is to merely utter the words "we're working on it" so that circumcision is never condemned for the genital mutilation it is. Everyone on there is "studying" circumcision alright; finding ways to keep it going...

    ReplyDelete
  9. Circumcision is cruel and barbaric!

    ReplyDelete
  10. I heard a story on NPR about the San Fran ban on circumcision. It was very pro-circumcision. I was very upset after listening.

    ReplyDelete

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails