Otolaryngologists as Interview Sources Requires Thorough Topic Knowledge and Knowing How Media Works

In today’s media-saturated environment, an otolaryngologist’s chances of winding up face to face with a mainstream print journalist or onscreen reporter have risen considerably. This has been particularly evident since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, when the public’s thirst for medical knowledge and advice took top billing in every media outlet’s daily editorial lineup.

Although becoming a go-to expert in the media can be personally and professionally rewarding, physicians must navigate a learning curve and consider some risks. Ask Justin H. Turner, MD, PhD, associate professor in otolaryngology and biomedical engineering and vice-chair for research in the department of otolaryngology–head and neck surgery at Vanderbilt University in Nashville. Dr. Turner has interfaced with media outlets such as The Washington Post, USA Today, National Geographic, NBC News, ABC News, The New York Times, and CNN. “Serving as a medical source in the media comes with great responsibility,” he emphasized. “You are recognized as an expert, and what you say or recommend can often be taken very literally.”

Moreover, not all media outlets are created equally. Print, online, radio, and television journalism all differ in approach, protocols, depth of content, and more. Within each category, protocols and even journalistic standards may vary. Learning to navigate these differences is just one key to a successful relationship with the media.

ENTtoday spoke with otolaryngologists who interface regularly with media to learn how they safely and effectively operate in this fast-paced, headline-driven world, and what they think about the increased exposure of otolaryngology on media outlets.

Answering the Call

The COVID-19 pandemic translated to greater visibility for physicians of all stripes, especially otolaryngologists. These physicians and scientists had certainly not been “toiling in anonymity” before then—all credible journalists seek out sources based on criteria identifying them as especially valuable to their stories—but the pandemic shone a light on their work. “Although I had spoken to some media sources before, it was during the pandemic that I became more involved in being a medical source,” said Zara Patel, MD, professor of otolaryngology at Stanford University School of Medicine in Palo Alto, Calif., who has worked with CNN, NBC, The New York Times, Reuters, and many other media outlets. “My longstanding research in smell disorders led me to becoming a consultant for the Centers for Disease Control and advocating for loss of smell and taste to be added to the list of COVID-19 screening questions. As more people became affected, more media and news sources became interested in speaking to me about that.”

Benjamin Bleier, MD, director of endoscopic skull base surgery at Massachusetts Eye and Ear and an associate professor of otolaryngology–head and neck surgery at Harvard Medical School in Boston, had been accustomed to fielding print media requests routed to him for response. Then, some of his published research drew widespread interest. “[The work] had a lot to do with viral infection and nasal immunity and, in particular, developing an understanding of new immune mechanisms in the nose that are responsible for why we get more infections in the winter—which pertains to both COVID and general upper respiratory tract infections,” Dr. Bleier explained. One of the papers, first published online in late 2022, (J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2023;151:509-525) appeared in hundreds of papers globally, sparking multiple radio and TV interview requests ranging from the PBS NewsHour to the Weather Channel.

Some otolaryngologists, such as Nicole Aaronson, MD, MBA, a pediatric otolaryngologist at Nemours Children’s Health in Jacksonville, Fla., proactively seek media relationships. Her goal: to better educate the public. “I saw that a lot of patient families go online for their healthcare information and that much of that information is poor, biased, or written above the average American’s reading level. I wanted to help provide high-quality content that was accessible for families.”

I saw that a lot of patient families go online for their healthcare information and that much of that information is poor, biased, or written above the average American’s reading level. —Nicole Aaronson, MD, MBA

She started increasing her online presence by launching her own YouTube channel, Dr. Nicole Nose, to provide easy-to-digest pediatric otolaryngology content in short segments. She purposefully steered clear of silly or gimmicky approaches. “The responsibility entrusted to me to care for other people’s children is a serious one, and I endeavor to reflect that honor in how I present myself,” explained Dr. Aaronson, who is a regular source on Healthline and WebMD, and has developed relationships with a network of freelance print journalists.

A Question of Representation

There’s no single way for an otolaryngologist to become a media source. They might reach out to specific reporters directly, publish a consumer-targeted book, spearhead a health education campaign, or simply seek public relations representation. Often, however, the most effective conduit to mainstream media is the hospital, university, or medical society with which an otolaryngologist is affiliated.

In academic medicine, most large centers have a media office that can facilitate relationships with media organizations, and medical societies and hospitals/universities often help “match” medical sources with media representatives, noted Dr. Turner. “Otolaryngologists should use these resources and be aware of their purpose,” he added. “They serve to publicize great work at the institution and highlight its accomplished investigators or healthcare providers and provide an important resource to the public.”

The inclination for news organizations to consult prominent institutions as sources is surely a good thing—particularly, as Dr. Patel noted, “in a world where many have begun to profess expertise after simply Googling a topic.” Unsurprisingly, however, institutions tend to discourage their physicians from accepting interviews without going through their media office first. This allows time for due diligence to be performed and for the media organization to be deemed legitimate.

Under any circumstances, always be clear about whether you’re speaking on behalf of a body or as an individual physician, cautioned Dr. Patel. “Your obligation and responsibility to represent those organizations may temper what you would otherwise say when speaking on your own behalf,” she added.

Navigating the Terrain

Presenting material in a forum is familiar territory to physicians by the time they enter residency. Transferring those presentation skills to a media setting, however, means adapting them to the varying needs of each medium.

In print media, journalists often send over questions in lieu of or in advance of a conversation, enabling physicians to respond thoughtfully and thoroughly. Print also allows for some feedback and adjustment of quotes before publication; however, the written word wields a power that radio and television do not, reminded Dr. Turner. “Print media has a much longer shelf life. It may be accessed for months or years, depending on the topic,” he cautioned.

Before publication of his news-making study, Dr. Bleier interfaced mostly with magazines and newspapers. Then everything changed. “I was interviewed by Science Friday with Ira Flatow and several international reporters,” he said. “There were radio and television interviews—I was on PBS News Hour, the Weather Channel, and so forth.”

Dr. Bleier quickly picked up on some key differences among these outlets. “In a phone interview for a publication, we have time, we can review questions and clarify things,” he said. “With radio, almost every interview is pre-taped and edited afterward for time, but there’s still a lot of content that you need to get in. You don’t want to ramble, and you don’t want to shortchange the data. So, there’s a learning curve to figuring out the highlights and conveying them in a faithful and scientifically accurate way in the time allotted, and in a way that’s understandable to the interviewer and their audience.” Through the sheer repetition of interviews, Dr. Bleier developed a polished presentation, though he admitted that the experience was exhausting. “It’s nice because it’s a reflection of the impact of your work,” he acknowledged, “but at a certain point, you just want to stop talking about the same thing.” 

Pre-interview preparation is an individual choice. “I typically refresh myself in advance on the topic to be discussed—even in cases where I’m serving as a medical source on my own work,” said Dr. Turner, adding that he doesn’t typically ask for questions ahead of time. “If there is a question for which I do not have an answer, I simply communicate that and the reasons why. I do my best to accept media interviews only on topics [about] which I’m confident that I’m knowledgeable and experienced.”

In all media, the rule of thumb is, “Know your audience.” An interview subject should possess the same understanding, and tailoring content and verbiage to an audience is essential. It’s also a good exercise. “Speaking to patients with diverse backgrounds and educational levels requires us to develop our skills as communicators. This often means translating complex medical topics into verbiage that anyone can understand,” Dr. Turner said. “I often speak in interviews the way I would speak to a patient or family member.”

Mainstream reporters appreciate this, too, as most of them don’t have a strong medical or technical background.

Opinions about Opinions

Physicians who cultivate relationships with the media on their own (without the support and guidance of an institution) may choose to espouse a particular point of view, while others self-impose boundaries between widely reported scientific facts and theories and their own personal beliefs and experiences. Most are somewhere in the middle.

Likewise, different outlets may demonstrate a range of practices and attitudes regarding such boundaries. Coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic again provides the perfect example: Medical opinions were seemingly mixed with personal and political belief systems, which resulted in muddled messaging and conflicting advice given to an alarmed public. Moreover, the sense of urgency and the news-driven nature of media seemed to slam up against the slower, more methodical pace of science, leading to more confusion.

“It’s better to say, ‘I don’t know’ or ‘We don’t know yet’ than to editorialize or disseminate unconfirmed or premature information,” stressed Dr. Turner.

Dr. Patel concurred. “Anyone who understands science knows that as we accrue new pieces of information, we must allow that information to change a previously held conception,” she said. “The lay public may not inherently understand this, and the onus is on us, as physicians and scientists, to better communicate that simple truth to the public. Had we done this at the beginning of the pandemic, we could have saved ourselves the turmoil and ultimate suffering caused by mistrust of the medical and scientific professions, as new data changed public health policy over time. The public’s trust would have been much higher.”

What about topics you’re passionate about? A former political science major, Dr. Aaronson acknowledged that she has some strong opinions on topics, medical and otherwise, but she knows where to draw the line. “I try to provide data or at least my rationale for why I do things the way I do,” she explained. “In a recent Doctor Radio appearance, Dr. Max April and I were discussing tongue and lip tie, which sparks a lot of debate within segments of the medical community. We did our best to give context to the discussion, explain the different schools of thought, and give our perspectives based on our professional experiences.” In general, Dr. Aaronson tends to not speak out on anything non-otolaryngological. “I can’t imagine that anyone trying to navigate their child’s otolaryngology care wants to hear my opinion on term limits,” she said.

It’s important for otolaryngologists to remember that a media audience includes their colleagues. Dr. Patel says she always takes care to consider how her words may be received by other physicians or scientists. “The worst is reading an article about something you yourself have performed research on or a clinical disease state that you routinely treat and see someone quoted as saying something incorrect or misrepresenting the science or treatment options,” she said.

A Matter of Exposure

On balance, media exposure is a good thing for otolaryngology and the public, believes Dr. Bleier. “Otolaryngology is a field that affects almost everybody,” he pointed out. “When you think about upper respiratory tract infections or acute sinusitis, pediatric issues such as tonsillitis and ear infections, the diseases that we treat are among the most prevalent. There’s a disconnect between the fact that we’re a tiny field in terms of the ‘house of medicine,’ yet we have an outsized impact on patients’ quality of life.”

That said, it’s hard to understate the responsibility of representing medical science in the media. Among the pitfalls: speaking in an unconcise way that risks misinterpretation, feeling compelled to talk about things outside one’s expertise, misrepresenting one’s institution, being misrepresented by the media outlet (see “The Power of the Quote”), and allowing oneself to become compromised by conflicts of interest and financial incentives.

It’s helpful to remember that a media outlet’s goals are often completely different from the goals of its sources, and compromises may be necessary. Dr. Bleier gives an example: “If you’re a reporter and you’re being assessed by how many people click on your link, you’re incentivized to have a more robust, clickable title. In the world of academic medicine and science (at least in their purest form), we don’t have a lot of those pressures,” he explained. “So, we can sit here and criticize, but I think it’s important to acknowledge where people are coming from and meet them where they are.”

Meanwhile, the value of media exposure is potentially limitless. “Continuing to represent ourselves as the expert and trusted sources for medical information that we are,” said Dr. Patel, “is the only thing standing in the way of misinformation and further mistrust of the medical establishment taking hold.”

---

Linda Kossoff is a freelance medical writer based in Woodland Hills, Calif.