EU media pack stunned by Mad Panic Disease shock

Date: 01/08/1996

The European Commission appealed for calm amongst journalists and news junkies last night after unveiling disturbing new research which appears to link Mad Panic Disease (MPD) with certain aspects of information policy.

The Commission is calling for the immediate removal of columns, spiel and clichés from the news chain to reduce any possible risk to the media and the public.

The move looks certain to renew concern about Mad Panic Disease (MPD) in reporters and its human form Crikey-Jesus-look-at-this-story-on-the-front-page Disease (CJD).

European Commissioner Hype Merchant, with responsibility for nannying the public and creating worry and drama where none exist, insisted the proposed steps were only precautionary.

“What we have here is experimental evidence which does suggest that there could be a link between MPD and some forms of information dissemination.

“I must stress there is absolutely no evidence that there is any danger whatsoever from reading newspapers and listening to television and radio news in the normal way. But it is important for us to err on the side of caution while tests continue.”

Merchant told EU government ministers in charge of getting themselves into the spotlight that the research had only just been revealed in the wake of a consultation document from the World Headline Organisation (WHO). That document prompted a study by the Scaremongering and Vacillation Committee (SVC) into the risks posed by Transmissible Information Dissemination (TIDs) from the point of view of public health.

An expert subgroup appointed by the SVC submitted its own report to the full general information, features and sports sections of the SVC.

This report was welcomed as a scientifically-based analysis of the situation. The new Multi-Media Committee has also been asked to look at the matter.

Merchant told ministers: “I have to tell you now there is experimental evidence that Mad Panic Disease can be spread to sheep-like reporters. This raises the question: how can we be sure that a case of so-called factual reporting is not MPD in reporters?

“The MPD agent is certainly more widespread in the body of the reporter than in the general public. It has been detected in the spiel, clichés, columns and, most alarmingly, the quotes of reporters, while so far only appearing in the gossip and ruminant-mongering of other humans.

“The true picture is unclear, because these diseases are difficult to diagnose and easily mistaken for other conditions.”

Merchant said it was now vital to restore public confidence in news and perhaps avoid a loss of confidence in other forms of information.

“With that in mind, I am asking the Scaremongering and Vacillation Committee, in addition to examining the practical benefits of removing spiel, clichés, columns and quotes from news, to also consider the possibility of removing the spleens of journalists which are most likely to carry infectivity.”

Merchant admitted that implementing the measures would be difficult. “I hope we will be able to achieve agreement on a Community solution, although I recognise that there are very different news values in different member states,” he said.

The Commission is now believed to be looking into ways of placing an age limit on news. For instance, any information put out by the porte parole would have to be certified as being less than three days old.

It would only be published after a special journalists' committee had been given access to the Commission's news factory to ensure that all the hyperbole, fanciful commentary and pure fantasy had been removed during the regular so-called rendering process, which is designed to make the news fit to listen to and, if necessary, write down and publish.

Meanwhile, plans are also under discussion for a labelling scheme to categorise news as either “filler material”, “page sixish but only if there's a picture” or “potential front page stuff”.

Merchant said he hoped his measures would sort out “the sheep from the goats”, but last night there were signs that his statement had actually triggered a news scare, rather than avoided one.

“I think the whole thing is ridiculous,” said one national government official. “Nobody had the slightest concern about the kind of news they were absorbing until Merchant opened his mouth. I believe that until he has firm evidence to back up his claims, he should keep quiet.”

The immediate impact of the statement was a 15&percent; drop in newspaper sales, and an estimated 11&percent; fall in the numbers tuning into radio and television news.

One woman who normally buys two newspapers a day and watches the early evening news on television commented: “I'm not prepared to risk it after what Mr Merchant has said. If there is any risk at all of contamination from news, then I'd rather watch a game show, thanks all the same.”

But others were not prepared to respond to what were described as “alarmist” signals from Brussels.

“I think it's a load of nonsense. I think these stories about news being hyped up and distorted are just hype and distortion,” said one news-vendor.

Already there are fears of compensation claims against the EU budget if the downward trend in news continues. And there was speculation the panic might spread to chat shows and even documentaries unless member states can take swift measures to reassure the public.

Questions were also being raised about the validity of the research. A spokesman for Merchant explained how it was carried out.

“Our scientists conducted a series of experiments in the laboratory in which they fed a test sample of six ordinary reporters with completely contaminated information and successfully transmitted Mad Panic Disease to one of them.”

He added: “I must stress that at the moment this risk is theoretical and hypothetical because this was only achieved in laboratory conditions which bear no similarity to information-gathering at the Commission's briefings. There is no evidence at all that the information being disseminated under normal daily conditions has been contaminated by the time it reaches the journalists. What happens to it thereafter is now the subject of a completely separate study.”