News just in: London's LBC 97.3 radio are using legal chill in an attempt to silence Dr Ben Goldacre's criticism of their scaremongering over the MMR vaccine.
Britain is currently in the midst of a measles epidemic due to a sharp drop in the takeup of MMR. Why? Because certain sections the media have been relentlessly fear-mongering over the supposed link between the jab and autism, despite the fact that there is absolutely no evidence to support this claim. Even now, after most of the panic has subsided, some people insist on banging that hollow drum.
Kids are dying, and now those pointing out how dangerous this hysteria is are being threatened with legal action for their trouble. Please visit Ben's site and show your support.
- Log in to post comments
BBC Radio 4's Today programme had a piece about measles and vaccination today (Fri 6 Feb, sometime between 08:00 and 08:30). It was an improvement in some ways in that it gave no credence to the denialists and contrarians, but part of the report was an interview with "a parent". This parent, who no doubt considers himself responsible and caring, trotted out a whole series of ignorant canards: that perhaps having measles made one stronger compared with avoiding it, that he thought the government was only using triple vaccines to save costs (when asked if he had had his kids vaccinated with single vaccines, he said no!), that one wouldn't take risks, however small with one's own kids (obviously risks don't include measles complications!).
Obviously it makes better radio to have a real "member of the public" trot out this nonsense than to have a reporter bore us with the results of a survey, but I'm sure it does harm. Everything the parent said about measles and vaccination was at best untrue, at worst an outright lie, but if you listened you heard a reasonable sort of ordinary guy, articulate without being salesman-slimy, and that repetition of nonsense strengthens this misperceptions.
The medical guy (whose name I didn't note, sorry), neatly and politely demolished all of this nonsense, but by then the damage had been done.
I'm with Dr Ben and the thesis of his book that the publicity given to quacks, charlatans, liars, denialists, etc. by the media is probably more of a problem than the dishonest people themselves.
It's hard to believe that there isn't some kind of legal restraint made on journalists and broadcasters regarding the dissemination of (e.g.) incorrect medical information that has been shown, in a court of law, if necessary, to be false. If they break that putative law, thereby endangering people, then they get banged up, and have to make a public apology and retraction.
It should have the same measure of legality as practising medicine without a license, or incitement to cause civil unrest...
Naturally you'd have to make it very specific to medical knowledge, otherwise it'd be misused by naughty governments to silence dissenters, and there would still need to be a channel through which people could argue about a topic, but not one by which they could actually broadcast their dangerous ignorance all over the country while they're doing it, just to chase ratings with the old 'manufactured controversy' ploy.
Sure, journalists and broadcasters should have their rights â NEED to have their rights â but they really should be balanced with responsibilities as well.
Worth pointing out that LBC charge for their radio shows after broadcast so the lawyers may be legally correct. However the thoroughly confused and inadequate response by the broadcaster concerned,Jeni Barnett, does suggest the moral high ground is with Goldacre. IMHO the worst part of this is not the lawyers but the fingers in the ears attitude of Ms Barnett who blithely turns a tin ear to the criticism she is receiving in a fine example of the arrogance of ignorance.
While I agree that bloggers should be able to broadcast excerpts of programs so long as they give full attribution (usually the whole point of the piece), I do think that Ben is pushing it with a 44 minute long segment. Perhaps some shorter segments as examples and a link to the original program would have been wiser.
In any case I'd be happy to donate to a legal fund for his defence if this ever goes to court, it would be good to establish what the limits of fair dealing are.
Several transcripts of segments of the show are beginning to appear.
Martin of The Lay Scientist: The Barnett Transcript: Part 2 - The homeopath's phone call.
Podblack of Podblack Cat: Jeni Barnett On LBC 97.3FM UK Radio - Vs John From Epsom
HolfordWatch: Jeni Barnett and the Phone Call with Yasmin on the LBC MMR Segment
Just to warn anyone going to Ben's site that it doesn't seem to be displaying properly at the moment. I'm guessing it's getting an awful lot of traffic.
Please be patient.
There's a FaceBook group you can join to show support for Ben.
Let's remind these corporate bullies how many people care about the issues of MMR, science, and suppression of criticism.
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=47955872103
thanks. by Brooklyn