News and magazine publications are big business. The radio and TV networks that broadcast their daily news as they happen also have a lot of money riding on the quality of news they’re reporting. And, they particularly like to report on controversial stories because journalists from print and web media can milk these stories for all they’re worth.
That’s exactly why journalists and reporters are unafraid to skip the preliminary investigation into the issue and launch a cover story that’s full of sensational headlines and unverified statements.
For instance, vaping may use flavorings that have absolutely minimal amounts of diacetyl, but the fact that factory workers who were exposed to copious amounts of that chemical in their workplaces went on to develop popcorn lung disease later in life seems enough reason for the scare-mongering media to sensationalize the connection despite the lack of corollary evidence, such as medically certified cases of e-cigarette users who’d been diagnosed with that kind of respiratory illness. The fact that there’s none, so far, has been blatantly ignored by the media.
One headline warns “vaping could give you popcorn lung” while another article smugly declares that “smoking e-cigarettes is EXTREMELY harmful to your lungs” and still another claims “popcorn lung seen in e-cigarette smokers” in the URL. The problem with these headlines is the lack of corollary evidence that many people who vape have been diagnosed with popcorn lung disease or that vaping e-cigarettes is as extremely harmful as smoking conventional cigarettes, or worse.
So, who’s going to benefit most from the media’s negative spin on vaping? Obviously, big tobacco firms are worried that people will be smoking less and vaping more. Not only that, big honchos in politics have been considering the e-cigarette industry as their next profitable source of state and local government tax revenues.