LEADER 03147nam 2200733Ia 450 001 9910969775003321 005 20251117083302.0 010 $a9786613587633 010 $a9781280492402 010 $a1280492406 010 $a9780813548128 010 $a0813548128 024 7 $a10.36019/9780813548128 035 $a(CKB)2520000000007920 035 $a(EBL)870075 035 $a(OCoLC)593295655 035 $a(SSID)ssj0000336691 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)11248711 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000336691 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)10281923 035 $a(PQKB)11330679 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC870075 035 $a(MdBmJHUP)muse8063 035 $a(DE-B1597)526401 035 $a(OCoLC)1121058195 035 $a(DE-B1597)9780813548128 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL870075 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebr10367270 035 $a(CaONFJC)MIL358763 035 $a(EXLCZ)992520000000007920 100 $a20090224d2010 ub 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aur|n|---||||| 181 $ctxt 182 $cc 183 $acr 200 10$aDiagnosis, therapy, and evidence $econundrums in modern American medicine /$fGerald N. Grob and Allan V. Horwitz 205 $a1st ed. 210 $aNew Brunswick, NJ $cRutgers University Press$dc2010 215 $a1 online resource (271 p.) 225 1 $aCritical issues in health and medicine 300 $aDescription based upon print version of record. 311 08$a9780813546711 311 08$a0813546710 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references and index. 327 $tFrontmatter --$tContents --$tPreface --$tAbbreviations --$tChapter 1. Rhetoric and Reality in Modern American Medicine --$tChapter 2. Medical Rivalry and Etiological Speculation: The Case of Peptic Ulcer --$tChapter 3. How Theory Makes Bad Practice: The Case of Tonsillectomy --$tChapter 4. How Science Tries to Explain Deadly Diseases: Coronary Heart Disease and Cancer --$tChapter 5. Transforming Amorphous Stress into Discrete Disorders: The Case of Anxiety --$tChapter 6. Depression: Creating Consensus from Diagnostic Confusion --$tChapter 7. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder: The Result of Abnormal Environments or Abnormal Individuals? --$tEpilogue. Where Do We Go from Here? --$tNotes --$tIndex --$tAbout the Authors 330 $aEmploying historical and contemporary data and case studies, the authors also examine tonsillectomy, cancer, heart disease, anxiety, and depression, and identify differences between rhetoric and reality and the weaknesses in diagnosis and treatment. 410 0$aCritical issues in health and medicine. 606 $aSocial medicine$zUnited States 606 $aDiseases and history$zUnited States 606 $aDiagnosis 615 0$aSocial medicine 615 0$aDiseases and history 615 0$aDiagnosis. 676 $a362.1 700 $aGrob$b Gerald N.$f1931-2015.$0210740 701 $aHorwitz$b Allan V$0906604 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910969775003321 996 $aDiagnosis, therapy, and evidence$94477507 997 $aUNINA LEADER 02926nam 2200685Ia 450 001 9910961557803321 005 20251117072447.0 010 $a1-135-22975-9 010 $a1-135-22976-7 010 $a1-282-44417-4 010 $a9786612444173 010 $a0-203-09263-5 024 7 $a10.4324/9780203092637 035 $a(CKB)1000000000811376 035 $a(EBL)455480 035 $a(OCoLC)609844540 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL455480 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebr10358650 035 $a(CaONFJC)MIL244417 035 $a(OCoLC)742296894 035 $a(OCoLC)893194508 035 $a(OCoLC)1059568957 035 $a(FINmELB)ELB149184 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC455480 035 $a(EXLCZ)991000000000811376 100 $a20780525e20101976 uy 1 101 0 $aeng 135 $aur|n|---||||| 181 $ctxt$2rdacontent 182 $cc$2rdamedia 183 $acr$2rdacarrier 200 10$aBad news$hVolume 1 /$fGlasgow University Media Group ; [written by Peter Beharrell ... et al.] ; foreword by Richard Hoggart 205 $a1st ed. 210 $aAbingdon ;$aNew York $cRoutledge$d2010,c1976 215 $a1 online resource (331 p.) 225 1 $aRoutledge revivals 300 $aOriginally published in 1976. 311 08$a0-415-56787-4 311 08$a0-415-56376-3 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references and index. 327 $aBOOK COVER; TITLE_01; COPYRIGHT_01; COPYRIGHT_02; TITLE_02; COPYRIGHT_03; CONTENTS; FOREWORD; ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS; 1 REVIEWING THE NEWS; 2 CONSTRUCTING THE PROJECT; 3 INSIDE THE TELEVISION NEWSROOM; 4 MEASURE FOR EASURE; 5 CONTOURS OF COVERAGE; 6 TRADES UINIONS AND THE MEDIA; 7 DOWN TO CASES; APPENDIX 1; APPENDIX 2; NOTES; INDEX 330 $aIt is a commonly held belief that television news in Britain, on whatever channel, is more objective, more trustworthy, more neutral than press reporting. The illusion is exploded in this controversial study by the Glasgow University Media Group, originally published in 1976.The authors undertook an exhaustive monitoring of all television broadcasts over 6 months, from January to June 1975, with particular focus upon industrial news broadcasts, the TUC, strikes and industrial action, business and economic affairs.Their analysis showed how television news favours certain indivi 410 0$aRoutledge revivals. 606 $aTelevision broadcasting of news$zGreat Britain 606 $aBroadcast journalism$zGreat Britain 606 $aJournalism$xObjectivity 615 0$aTelevision broadcasting of news 615 0$aBroadcast journalism 615 0$aJournalism$xObjectivity. 676 $a070.19 676 $a384.554 701 $aBeharrell$b Peter$01874182 701 $aHoggart$b Richard$0126775 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910961557803321 996 $aBad news$94484582 997 $aUNINA