It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
...Bob Grant recently wrote a news story about a curious publication, The Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine. It sounds like a respectable journal, but it isn't. ...
The problem was this: The publication was invented to support Merck drugs and the AJBJM was entirely paid for by Merck, yet nowhere was the relationship disclosed. It was a stealth marketing campaign to Australian doctors under the guise of a regular journal.
Originally posted by earlywatcher
How would you define independent, so as the criminalize the opposite of it? does that mean a magazine or newspaper couldn't accept advertising? No paid "product placements"? no more schwag at trade shows?
Originally posted by Kailassa
Originally posted by earlywatcher
I'd say when a company owns, either directly or indirectly, a controlling interest in a publication which pushes its own products, it should have to clearly indicate that fact on the first page of the publication.
How does that sound to you?
I would LOVE this solution! It would simplify so many things. If we could only know who is backing this or that we can know how to take things. I don't think it would be a bad thing at all, just useful information.
so how do we make this happen?
Originally posted by earlywatcher
so how do we make this happen?
You said :
With the right staff and vision ...
You said :
I think we'd like to think science is pure but i'm afraid that the people who give out the grants that pay for research might have an agenda.
When it comes to books, I can see it would be useful to have an indication of a commercial outfit provided money for publication or marketing, but what about the research or subject matter itself? of if the author receives funds from certain foundations? should there be an indication of all these things?
it's tricky.
I don't think science is a laugh
Originally posted by muzzleflash
this is just yet the trillionth reason to avoid the pharma corporations at EVERY cost!
An environmental start-up backed by Al Gore's venture capital firm aims to take advantage of coming U.S. climate change legislation by helping companies like Coca Cola and even cities cut pollution. Hara, a 25-employee company that debuted in 2008, provides online software to help companies reduce their carbon footprint -- a $2.5 billion market that will grow 10-fold if the proposed energy bill, which will require companies to get permits for emissions, becomes law, Chief Executive Amit Chatterjee said.
Originally posted by MemoryShock
Stealth Marketing...
What if a drug company paid for the marketing to convince you that basic symptoms were actually a psychological disorder and required medication?