An AP wire release tells us that the FDA finally approved Plan B for over the counter sales. I am glad the government finally approved Plan B for over the counter sales, but that is not the major point I want to make.
The media tries very hard to present information in a neutral way. They often try this by presenting “both” sides of an issue. In this article, they tried to present the “other” side by ending with this paragraph.
Contraceptive advocates and doctors’ groups say easier access to Plan B could halve the nation’s 3 million annual unintended pregnancies. Opponents say wider access to the pill could promote promiscuity.
And this is the end of the article. Absurd!
The government (especially the FDA) is not supposed to regulate promiscuity. Public health officials should be worried about sexually transmitted diseases, but that is not the same thing as regulating promiscuity. Furthermore, the abstinence movement has helped to prove that educating people about sex is better at preventing diseases and pregnancy than trying to get people to have less sex. Even if we knew for sure that Plan B would certainly lead to more promiscuity, it should not be a factor in the FDA’s decision.
In an attempt to prevent a balanced view of this topic, the media ended up promoting an illogical and irrelevant issue. The least they could have done is add another sentence, “The FDA, however, is tasked with protecting the public health and must use scientific evidence when making decisions; issues such as promoting promiscuity should not be a part of the approval process.”
I agree with all the points you make, but I would prefer that we not encourage the media to make any “should” statements when it comes to government policy.