Page 411 |
Previous | 418 of 703 | Next |
|
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
|
Loading content ...
August, 1941 HOUSE OF DELEGATES 411 thing because of the possibility and not the probability of aspirin bringing on aspirin poison. “It seems to me that if your organization could work out some plan whereby you could advise the newspapers as to what copy they should or should not accept and let the newspapers be the final judge as to whether or not the copy appeared, it would be better than having the newspapers submit the copy to a health officer. We would be glad to cooperate in an undertaking of this sort, but we would not be willing to turn over to a health officer the right to say what advertising we could or could not accept.” From The Raleigh Times: “Your letter of May 2 regarding medical advertising copy is quite interesting. “We thoroughly approve your idea, and have been for some time carefully scrutinizing medical copy whi^h claims cures. “We shall be glad to follow any plan which would seem to be appropriate for the newspapers as a whole in North Carolina in securing the objective you have in mind.” From the Kinston Free Press: “Answering your letter of May 8, we write to advise that it has been our policy for many years to exclude from our advertising columns advertising of questionable goods. “It has been our practice to consult our health authorities from time to time in reference to such advertising which we felt was questionable or about which we haven’t had prior information. “While we would not commit ourselves definitely to submit all drug advertisements to health authorities, you can count on us to cooperate in endeavoring to exclude from our columns those that are questionable and spurious.” From the Wilmington Star-News: “We do not see where any good purpose could be accomplished by submitting to you medical copy sent to us for publication as advertising. “We endeavor to keep our advertising columns clean, not alone medical copy, but other advertising submitted and only accept advertising from reputable advertising agencies. “For your information, the Federal Trade Commission has supervision over mis-statements in all type of advertising and to submit copy to you, we feel is unnecessary.” From the Hickory Daily Record: “We shall be very glad to work through our local medical society in an effort to eliminate advertising of injurious drugs or “cures”. “As you understand, an arrangement would have to be worked out on a practical basis so that we could consult some responsible physician and find out without delay concerning a given product which had been submitted to us for advertising. “We do not believe that any responsible newspaper wants to advertise a remedy that is injurious, drug-forming or recommended as a cure when as a matter of fact it is a fake.” From the Goldsboro News-Argus: “I have your letter requesting us to submit all advertising to censorship by state or local county health officers. “Since you say you have written all daily papers of the state on the subject I think it might be well for the whole matter to be taken up at the next meeting of representatives of the daily papers which will come next month in Charlotte.” From Radio Station WBIG, Greensboro; “We have been working very closely with our city health officer, Dr. C. C. Hudson. I think he will bear me out in telling you that we do not carry any “cures” over this station. “Our continuity is periodically sent to the Federal Trade Commission in Washington for inspection. “We are enclosing you herewith a copy of the NAB Code which we follow out very carefully. WBIG was the first station in North Carolina to censor its medical advertising, and this fact will be borne out by Dr. Reynolds of the State Medical Department, who carried an article in the health journal. “We assure you of our cooperation.” The Greensboro News Company; “We have attempted several times to put across advertising campaigns designed to give our readers reliable information and suggestions covering health matters, but in every instance such campaigns have been blocked by the medical profession as unethical and too costly.” I answered their letter and asked them to give me more information. This is their reply: “Referring to your letter of May 16, our first experience in trying to work with the medical profession on publicity matters was with dentists. We made two attempts to get dentists in Greensboro and vicinity to underwrite an educational advertising campaign on the care of the teeth. This campaign was prepared by an outstanding Southern advertising agency in cooperation with officials of one of the state dental societies. I have forgotten the details and our files have long ago been cleared of this material. All of the dentists thought it would be a fine thing to publish in our newspapers, but they were unwilling to spend the small individual sums necessary to put the campaign across because they felt it was unethical to run such advertising. “Later on, another attempt was made to develop a similar campaign with the dentists of this territory and this, too, was unsuccessful. “Two or three years later, a campaign was developed for physicians and surgeons which had the endorsement of the American Medical Association, as I recall, and a number of state medical groups. This campaign was put before the local medical organization and, as I recall, the opinion was that the publication of this copy would do a great deal of good, but we could get no active support and no contributions to the campaign. “Still later, we approached the Guilford County Medical Society regarding an institutional advertising campaign in our newspapers and we obtained several excellent interviews with the head of the Society and developed what we thought an excellent plan for educating the public regarding the importance of physicians and surgeons and the advantage of consulting them first of all about health matters. When this campaign was placed before the entire body of physicians it was impossible to get their cooperation. “It has been our observation that medical organizations and individual physicians are not averse to seeking free publicity at all times regarding their organizations and activities, but that when there is any suggestion as to using paid space, it is immediately branded as unethical. “We hold no brief for patent medicine copy and think a lot of copy is prepared and published that should not be allowed in print. On the other hand, we feel that while newspapers have an obligation in educating the public, this obligation should be shared, at least in part, by organized medical men. I think physicians and surgeons have suffered a loss of income and that the public health has suffered by the lack of proper health education through paid advertising. If newspapers were so set up that they could operate on circulation revenue alone, then I think this obligation would be wholly that of publishers. This is not the case, however, and
Object Description
Rating | |
Fixed Title * | NCHH-17: North Carolina Medical Journal [1940-2001] |
Document Title | North Carolina Medical Journal [1940-2001] |
Subject Topical Other | Public Health -- Periodicals.; Physicians -- North Carolina -- Directory.; Societies, Medical -- North Carolina -- Periodicals. |
Description | Includes Transactions of the Society, -1960; 1961- , Transactions issued separately, bound in.; Includes Transactions of the auxiliary to the Medical Society of the State of North Carolina and Proceedings of the North Carolina Public Health Association. Official organ of the Medical Society of the State of North Carolina, 1940-May 1972; of the North Carolina Medical Society, June 1972-. Vols. for 1940-May 1972 published by the Medical Society of the State of North Carolina; June 1972- by the North Carolina Medical Society. |
Contributor | Medical Society of the State of North Carolina. Transactions.; Medical Society of the State of North Carolina.; North Carolina Medical Society.; North Carolina Medical Society. Transactions.; North Carolina Public Health Association. Proceedings. |
Publisher | [Winston-Salem] : North Carolina Medical Society [etc.], 1940- |
Repository | University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Health Sciences Library. |
Host | University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill |
Date | 1941 |
Identifier | NCHH-17-002 |
Form General | Periodicals |
Language | English |
Rights | This item is part of the North Carolina History of Health Digital Collection. Some materials in the Collection are protected by U.S. copyright law. This item is presented by the Health Sciences Library of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill for research and educational purposes. It may not be republished or distributed without permission of the Health Sciences Library. |
Digital Collection | North Carolina History of Health Digital Collection |
Sponsor | The North Carolina History of Health Digital Collection is an open access publishing initiative of the Health Sciences Library of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Financial support for the initiative was provided in part by a multi-year NC ECHO (Exploring Cultural Heritage Online) digitization grant, awarded by the State Library of North Carolina, and funded through the Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA). |
Volume Number | 2 |
Health Discipline | Medicine |
Digital Format | JPEG 2000 |
Print / Download PDF Version | http://archives.hsl.unc.edu/nchh/nchh-17/nchh-17-002.pdf |
Document Sort | all; nchh-17 |
Volume Link | http://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm/search/collection/nchh/field/identi/searchterm/NCHH-17-002 |
Title Link | http://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm/search/collection/nchh/field/documa/searchterm/NCHH-17 |
Catalog Record link | http://search.lib.unc.edu/search?R=UNCb1306322 |
Revision History | done |
Description
Fixed Title * | Page 411 |
Document Title | North Carolina Medical Journal [1940-2001] |
Subject Topical Other | Public Health -- Periodicals.; Physicians -- North Carolina -- Directory.; Societies, Medical -- North Carolina -- Periodicals. |
Description | Includes Transactions of the Society, -1960; 1961- , Transactions issued separately, bound in.; Includes Transactions of the auxiliary to the Medical Society of the State of North Carolina and Proceedings of the North Carolina Public Health Association. Official organ of the Medical Society of the State of North Carolina, 1940-May 1972; of the North Carolina Medical Society, June 1972-. Vols. for 1940-May 1972 published by the Medical Society of the State of North Carolina; June 1972- by the North Carolina Medical Society. |
Contributor | Medical Society of the State of North Carolina. Transactions.; Medical Society of the State of North Carolina.; North Carolina Medical Society.; North Carolina Medical Society. Transactions.; North Carolina Public Health Association. Proceedings. |
Publisher | [Winston-Salem] : North Carolina Medical Society [etc.], 1940- |
Repository | University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Health Sciences Library. |
Host | University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill |
Date | 1941 |
Identifier | NCHH-17-002-0423 |
Form General | Periodicals |
Page Type | all; organizational news; report/review |
Language | English |
Rights | This item is part of the North Carolina History of Health Digital Collection. Some materials in the Collection are protected by U.S. copyright law. This item is presented by the Health Sciences Library of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill for research and educational purposes. It may not be republished or distributed without permission of the Health Sciences Library. |
Filename | northcarolinamed21941medi_0423.jp2 |
Digital Collection | North Carolina History of Health Digital Collection |
Sponsor | The North Carolina History of Health Digital Collection is an open access publishing initiative of the Health Sciences Library of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Financial support for the initiative was provided in part by a multi-year NC ECHO (Exploring Cultural Heritage Online) digitization grant, awarded by the State Library of North Carolina, and funded through the Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA). |
Volume Number | 2 |
Issue Number | 8 |
Page Number | 411 |
Health Discipline | Medicine |
Full Text | August, 1941 HOUSE OF DELEGATES 411 thing because of the possibility and not the probability of aspirin bringing on aspirin poison. “It seems to me that if your organization could work out some plan whereby you could advise the newspapers as to what copy they should or should not accept and let the newspapers be the final judge as to whether or not the copy appeared, it would be better than having the newspapers submit the copy to a health officer. We would be glad to cooperate in an undertaking of this sort, but we would not be willing to turn over to a health officer the right to say what advertising we could or could not accept.” From The Raleigh Times: “Your letter of May 2 regarding medical advertising copy is quite interesting. “We thoroughly approve your idea, and have been for some time carefully scrutinizing medical copy whi^h claims cures. “We shall be glad to follow any plan which would seem to be appropriate for the newspapers as a whole in North Carolina in securing the objective you have in mind.” From the Kinston Free Press: “Answering your letter of May 8, we write to advise that it has been our policy for many years to exclude from our advertising columns advertising of questionable goods. “It has been our practice to consult our health authorities from time to time in reference to such advertising which we felt was questionable or about which we haven’t had prior information. “While we would not commit ourselves definitely to submit all drug advertisements to health authorities, you can count on us to cooperate in endeavoring to exclude from our columns those that are questionable and spurious.” From the Wilmington Star-News: “We do not see where any good purpose could be accomplished by submitting to you medical copy sent to us for publication as advertising. “We endeavor to keep our advertising columns clean, not alone medical copy, but other advertising submitted and only accept advertising from reputable advertising agencies. “For your information, the Federal Trade Commission has supervision over mis-statements in all type of advertising and to submit copy to you, we feel is unnecessary.” From the Hickory Daily Record: “We shall be very glad to work through our local medical society in an effort to eliminate advertising of injurious drugs or “cures”. “As you understand, an arrangement would have to be worked out on a practical basis so that we could consult some responsible physician and find out without delay concerning a given product which had been submitted to us for advertising. “We do not believe that any responsible newspaper wants to advertise a remedy that is injurious, drug-forming or recommended as a cure when as a matter of fact it is a fake.” From the Goldsboro News-Argus: “I have your letter requesting us to submit all advertising to censorship by state or local county health officers. “Since you say you have written all daily papers of the state on the subject I think it might be well for the whole matter to be taken up at the next meeting of representatives of the daily papers which will come next month in Charlotte.” From Radio Station WBIG, Greensboro; “We have been working very closely with our city health officer, Dr. C. C. Hudson. I think he will bear me out in telling you that we do not carry any “cures” over this station. “Our continuity is periodically sent to the Federal Trade Commission in Washington for inspection. “We are enclosing you herewith a copy of the NAB Code which we follow out very carefully. WBIG was the first station in North Carolina to censor its medical advertising, and this fact will be borne out by Dr. Reynolds of the State Medical Department, who carried an article in the health journal. “We assure you of our cooperation.” The Greensboro News Company; “We have attempted several times to put across advertising campaigns designed to give our readers reliable information and suggestions covering health matters, but in every instance such campaigns have been blocked by the medical profession as unethical and too costly.” I answered their letter and asked them to give me more information. This is their reply: “Referring to your letter of May 16, our first experience in trying to work with the medical profession on publicity matters was with dentists. We made two attempts to get dentists in Greensboro and vicinity to underwrite an educational advertising campaign on the care of the teeth. This campaign was prepared by an outstanding Southern advertising agency in cooperation with officials of one of the state dental societies. I have forgotten the details and our files have long ago been cleared of this material. All of the dentists thought it would be a fine thing to publish in our newspapers, but they were unwilling to spend the small individual sums necessary to put the campaign across because they felt it was unethical to run such advertising. “Later on, another attempt was made to develop a similar campaign with the dentists of this territory and this, too, was unsuccessful. “Two or three years later, a campaign was developed for physicians and surgeons which had the endorsement of the American Medical Association, as I recall, and a number of state medical groups. This campaign was put before the local medical organization and, as I recall, the opinion was that the publication of this copy would do a great deal of good, but we could get no active support and no contributions to the campaign. “Still later, we approached the Guilford County Medical Society regarding an institutional advertising campaign in our newspapers and we obtained several excellent interviews with the head of the Society and developed what we thought an excellent plan for educating the public regarding the importance of physicians and surgeons and the advantage of consulting them first of all about health matters. When this campaign was placed before the entire body of physicians it was impossible to get their cooperation. “It has been our observation that medical organizations and individual physicians are not averse to seeking free publicity at all times regarding their organizations and activities, but that when there is any suggestion as to using paid space, it is immediately branded as unethical. “We hold no brief for patent medicine copy and think a lot of copy is prepared and published that should not be allowed in print. On the other hand, we feel that while newspapers have an obligation in educating the public, this obligation should be shared, at least in part, by organized medical men. I think physicians and surgeons have suffered a loss of income and that the public health has suffered by the lack of proper health education through paid advertising. If newspapers were so set up that they could operate on circulation revenue alone, then I think this obligation would be wholly that of publishers. This is not the case, however, and |
Digital Format | JPEG 2000 |
Print / Download PDF Version | http://archives.hsl.unc.edu/nchh/nchh-17/nchh-17-002.pdf |
Document Sort | all; nchh-17 |
Volume Link | http://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm/search/collection/nchh/field/identi/searchterm/NCHH-17-002 |
Title Link | http://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm/search/collection/nchh/field/documa/searchterm/NCHH-17 |
Catalog Record link | http://search.lib.unc.edu/search?R=UNCb1306322 |
Revision History | done |
Tags
Comments
Post a Comment for Page 411