This has been a week where a spotlight has shone on the dangers of unregulated broadcast or publication across the whole of the media.
The newspapers took a hit when The New York Times published a hard-line opinion piece written by a Republican senator without it first being okayed by the editor, prompting the editor to resign.
Social media, increasingly used by many as their main source of information, broadcast a jaw-dropping video of an ECP implying that now was a good time to steal patients from rivals. This prompted the AOP to express ‘the deepest concern’ at the video (widely viewed on LinkedIn) that shows a practice apparently operating in breach of the current restrictions on providing routine eye care. The College noted ‘the considerable frustration at reports suggesting that some practices may be breaking national guidelines and providing routine eye care appointments that are not essential or urgent/emergency.’ My heart went out to colleagues I know working for the same group who offer first class eye care and would be worried about how this reflected on them.
High profile refereed journals, NEJM and The Lancet, had to retract major rushed through papers after learning that data from the group Surgisphere was unreliable. This reminds us to always question research, particularly during such times as these. I hope to publish something on the best ways to do this in the months to come.
Finally, some play has been made of the fact that the countries most successfully responding to the pandemic are those with a woman as the head of state. This may, of course, be mere coincidence in the same way as the countries with the highest death rates just happen to have a right-wing populist at the helm.
