Scientific press requires examination with a critical eye.  This being said, our Mass Media and Society class has been assigned the task of reading a scientific or health related article from a mainstream media source and analyzing the techniques used. Using an article entitled “The Possibilities in Hypnosis, Where the Patient Has the Power” from the New York Times, I studied the methods that author Jane E. Brody utilized to report her findings.  In my opinion, Brody did a fair job at reporting about hypnosis, however, there is a lack of information and some of the text appears sensationalized.

The cases used in the piece are very motivational, making it seem as if hypnosis is a miracle treatment. Brody qualifies her findings by asserting “Hypnosis has been mired in controversy for two centuries, and its benefits are often overstated. It does not help everyone who wants to quit smoking, for example; then again, neither do other kinds of treatments.”  Yet this is the only evidence I find that covers the less publicized façade of hypnosis.  The majority of the piece hones in on the success stories of those who have benefitted from hypnosis, yet it provides no such information about possible side effects or negative responses to treatment.  Brody employs a personal anecdote about her husband quitting smoking and several other success stories that make me as a reader believe hypnosis to be a very proactive solution to everyday problems.  But at the same time, it is vital for her to use more of a custodian of fact role and present both sides of hypnosis in order for the audience to make informed decisions on the therapy.

As a whole, the article comes across as very sensationalized. With statements such as “hypnosis is the epitome of mind-body medicine,” the therapy comes across as a very positive and powerful method of overcoming life issues.  While I do not doubt the strength of hypnosis, I do believe that much of the piece promotes the therapy and portrays it as a way of perfecting habits or fears. Brody even cites several hypnotic doctors and then references their books, CD’s, tapes, and websites as resources.  Although some may find the product placement helpful, I see it as a form of advertising that takes away from the objectiveness of the piece.  The doctors that contributed their expertise to the article appeared credible, but it posed as a distraction that their practice and products were displayed alongside their quotes.

I understand the necessity for journalists to sensationalize a new health breakthrough such as hypnosis, but it is crucial for a more in-depth analysis. “The Possibilities in Hypnosis, Where the Patient Has the Power” is a perfect example of a piece that superficially explores a new type of therapy, but lacks in its ability to provide ample evidence from both sides.  Brody presents her information in a unique way, using anecdotes to guide her flow.  The balance of her technique and her weaknesses create an adequate article with room for improvement.

Reference: Brody, Jane E. The Possiblities in Hypnosis, Where the Patient Has the Power. (2008, November 4). The New York Times, p. D7.