Still unsure what the media should call the virus in order to get the most hits and rankings, I’ll avoid the term “swine flu” for now.
Sounds like the press is reaching a peak on this story and rather quickly. Just yesterday, we were bombarded with news updates on reported cases of the virus in the U.S. Then, the WHO Director General raised the level of awareness to 5, activating pandemic preparedness plans on a global level, which was concerning, but, thankfully, did not cause general panic.
But doesn’t it seem like the public is fed up with so much coverage on the topic already? I know I am getting there. Some say the story is overblown, and I tend to agree with Jack Cafferty here: http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2009/04/30/has-swine-flu-story-been-overblown/ Some agree with the previous post I wrote on the cycle of news. Others say that the public should be aware of the issue and the more facts surrounding the topic the better. Others are more concerned about the President’s first 100 days.
The point is, as much as the H1N1 virus is a hot headline right now, it may have reached the climax surprisingly early in just a week. Perhaps because of the fact that we receive news from so many outlets and resources today versus just a few years ago, might be adding to this frustration of “too much news, too fast.” Bombardment on any topic naturally desensitizes the public so that news gets old very quickly.
It will be interesting to see how the media will continue to keep this story alive enough to be on the front page… and for how long? Will it be through exaggerated headlines, good and accurate reporting, or by feeding fire to the story via social media?