On communication—editors and reporters should not be blamed

Editor—It's a tale so sad it's difficult to suppress a smile. In only two of eight interviews was Fallowfield able to communicate what she wanted to say about communication skills.¹ I too am depressed by the standard of some—but certainly not all—of the medical reporting on news programmes but it's a bit of a copout to blame editors and reporters, who work to a different agenda from people who seek publicity.

Doctors accused of having poor communication skills are not allowed to blame their patients. The fault, their teachers tell them, lies not in their audience but in themselves. Surely the same stricture applies to people who teach or promote communication skills.

The media in the 21st century are difficult and dangerous channels to navigate for those who seek publicity for their work or for themselves. Yet people can win themselves a chance to say what they want if they acquire the necessary skills. Many of these are the skills that doctors need with patients: seeking to understand the world in which the patient, as opposed to the doctor, lives and works; considering the patient's rather than the doctor's reason for having a consultation, learning what went wrong by analysing bitter experiences; and so on.

There are, however, many other skills, best learnt from those who do this sort of thing for a living. One of the most useful is to follow Larkin's commendable advice on bmj.com to turn down the offer of an interview that is unlikely to be fruitful.²