Drugmaker Sponsors Journalism Group Seminar
19 CommentsBy Ed Silverman // July 25th, 2008 // 11:48 am
We spend an awful lot of time on this site detailing (pun intended) how drugmakers provide various forms of funding to doctors, particularly continuing medical education. The issue is controversial, as you may know, because it speaks to influencing what is supposed to be independent medical judgment.
So we are surprised to see that Unity, a minority journalism group, allowed Novo Nordisk to sponsor and organize a seminar at its latest convention in Chicago. The drugmaker hosted a lunch yesterday called “The Diabetes Explosion: A Call to Action for Journalists of Color.” And Novo Nordisk makes and markets diabetes products.
What’s wrong with that? Journalists should do their best to remain free of influence. We do not wish to moralize, but Unity should have known better. If its members want to learn about diabetes, the organization should find another way of holding a ‘Lunch n Learn’ seminar that is not organized and run by a company with a vested interest in the subject.
The panelists included docs from Harvard, Johns Hopkins and the National Institutes of Health, and some journalists, the WSJ Health blog writes. The promotional material promised attendees would hear from “distinguished experts in diabetes” about the disproportionate effect of type 2 diabetes on people of color and “how journalism can be used to help combat this disease,” according to the blog.
A Novo Nordisk spokeswoman tells the blog that 274 journalists showed up, and that the drugmaker selected the speakers and “set the agenda” for what the panelists should talk about, but that the panelists came up with their own presentations. There was no discussion of brand-name drugs, she insists, or any effort to promote Novo Nordisk products, she continues, adding that the lunch was the first time Novo Nordisk sponsored such an event for journalists. May it be the last.
We have reached out to a spokeswoman for Unity and will update you with any reply. As the WSJ blog points out, the Association of Health Care Journalists, a group to which we have belonged for several years, does not accept funds from manufacturers of health-care products, including drugs and medical devices.
Novo isn’t the only drugmaker making a financial contribution to Unity. Eli Lilly is a bronze sponsor of the event.
Christopher
Another way of looking at this is to acknowledge that the speakers from noted academic institutions actually are experts in diabetes, that diabetes is a condition that disproportionally affects large numbers of ‘minorities’, and that attending journalists are smart enough and sufficiently discerning to sniff out any undue influence (none mentioned). Also it appears that Novo Nordisk did nothing to conceal its interests. If the issue is full disclosure there seems no breach. And it also seems like a worthwhile initiative if more of the target audience can be made more aware of a serious health risk.
Ed Silverman
Hi Chris,
Fair point, and I agree that there does not appear to be a disclosure issue, and that education is a good thing.
However, a journalism group should not allow a drugmaker to choose the speakers to discuss a disease corresponding to its product portfolio.
And journalists should be smart enough to sniff out any undue bias toward this or that company or product. But the situation should be not set up like this in the first place.
Unity should have organized and run the panel itself. Presumably, there are enough smart journalists in the group to take control without having to rely on a company with a vested interest.
Cheers
ed
Paul G
I agree with Christopher, Ed. We must stop throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
Justice in MI
trinkets?
Ed Silverman
Hi Paul G,
As I indicated, I’m all in favor of education. But I don’t believe I’m saying otherwise, by suggesting the journalism group run its own seminar and not rely on a company with a vested interest to organize the effort. This is not a zero-sum game.
Regards
ed
Laurie
“and that the drugmaker selected the speakers and “set the agenda” for what the panelists should talk about,”
This is the part that bothers me. The sponsoring openly is fine….the “setting the agenda” and selecting who is going to speak is a problem.
Norm
Novo is certainly an important stakeholder in the diabetes field. Medical literacy is essential in helping people understand their disease and potential treatments. No harm-no foul.
Christopher
Ed,
I understand that when journalists attend press conferences or scan press releases they apply judgement about whether the messages and info contained are worth considering. Presumably the same scrutiny would be applied in a situation such as this?
I understand the concern about outside interests but organizing seminars such as this requires time, motivation, and specialist knowledge (I’ve organized a few, as you know) and perhaps there wasn’t enough interest or energy to take the initiative to plan such a session, although there seems to have been plenty of interest in attending.
I’d be interested if any other seminars at Unity’s meeting were industry-sponsored or if they were organized internally.
Cheers
Ed Silverman
Hi Christopher,
Presumably, yes, the journalists in attendance will understand the sponsor has a vested interest. My criticism, however, was directed at Unity.
And I agree that pulling together such panels can be time-consuming. I’ve done a couple myself for this or that conference. Just the same, Unity should have handled this differently.
As to your question, I honestly don’t know about other such industry-sponsored seminars because I’m not at the convention. But I’ll spend some time on the web site later to see if I come across anything that’s listed.
Cheers
ed
Dan
http://www.healthcarejournalism.org Check it out.
Atlex
Ed,
As a former member of SPJ (many, many years ago), I figured that there might be a part of the Code of Conduct that covers this. However, and unfortunately, the Unity function seems to fall in a gray area. Here’s what the SPJ code of conduct says (i only included part of the COI section).
Journalists should:
—Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.
— Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.
— Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and shun secondary employment, political involvement, public office and service in community organizations if they compromise journalistic integrity.
— Disclose unavoidable conflicts.
— Deny favored treatment to advertisers and special interests and resist their pressure to influence news coverage.
Be wary of sources offering information for favors or money; avoid bidding for news.
Atlex
Nathan
Ed,
Just so I’m clear: You would be opposed to ANY corporation sponsored lunch at such a trade show, right? Surely other industries besides pharma try to catch the ear of journalists by offering free “lunch-and-learn” type seminars. Am I wrong? Do journalists always turn down such meetings?
Ok, here’s a scenario. Suppose I offered to buy you lunch in the city and tell you a little about my employer and my perspective on the pharma industry. Would you turn me down? Just offer to pay for your own lunch?
Seriously, I’m genuinely curious here. I’m not trying to be a smart***. If someone offers me lunch at a conference in order to tell me about a new product, I gladly take the free lunch! (and I learn a little too, of course) So I’m just wondering what ethical standard you hold yourself to in journalism.
Ed Silverman
Hi Nathan,
In the episode concerning Unity, the journalism group could - and should - have found a way to educate its members about diabetes without relying on funding and organizing from a company that stands to benefit from diabetes treatments.
In my view, this logic should extend to other situations, such as the one you pose. Again, my remarks were targeted at Unity for making this scenario possible. The journalists who attended simply showed up and I’m going to take an educated guess that few would say they were compromised. Of course, some may take a very hard line. But again, the real issue, to me, was that Unity allowed Novo Nordisk to run the show in the first place.
To answer your other question - I won’t pretend to speak for other journalists, but I prefer to keep everything at arm’s length. You want to talk over lunch, fine. Either I pay for both of us or we get separate checks. I’ve been doing this for many years. Now, have I had a nosh at a company press conference in years past? Yes, especially when an hours-long event was held at a location where no other food was readily available. (And so long as I made sure the public relations person tasted it first and didn’t get sick). There’s no law about any of this. Just an effort to use common sense.
The issue you’re asking about is one of appearance. But again, I’m not chastising the journalists who attended the Unity lunch. My criticism was addressed specifically to the convention organizers. They should have known better than to create this situation.
Hope this helps,
ed
Christopher
I guess booty is in the eye of the beholden. But if you’re not it’s OK to turn up.
Onwards…
Podina
I attended the luncheon and have to say that after seeing the other companies ‘gross’ display of their “agendas” including handsouts of press kits and company material, none of which was done at this luncheon was a step above in terms of the information that was provided. I agree with the others in that no branded or “underhanded” activities took place.
I applaude NN for raising this critical issue as it does affect minorities in a huge way and is a growing problem.
I don’t think UNITY has done anything wrong in trying to expand outside of the media giants to encourage other entities with a vested interest in solving this problem to participate at all.
Personally I feel you are making a mountain out of a mole hill — speak to anyone who attended (did you?) the luncheon and I am sure they will tell you that they agree the pharma “support” was invisible and the gain to we who are trying to raise this issue within our constituents was invaluable!
Podina
Oh, and BTW, did you attend Lilly’s event - talk about self promotion!!!!! I think you might target them and how UNITY allowed their blatant product promotion. Makes me wonder if you have an agenda towards NN?
Ed Silverman
Hi Podina,
No, I wasn’t there, as I indicated in one of my earlier comments. And I didn’t accuse anyone of underhanded activities.
And I also noted in an earlier comment that the effort to provide education about diabetes is worthwhile and commendable. Did you read my subsequent remarks?
To your other remark, no, again, I wasn’t at the event, unfortunately, to see the Lilly presentation. I don’t have an agenda against anyone. I relied on the report from the WSJ blog, as I indicated with the attribution and the link in my post, for better or worse.
The criticism I leveled was at the decision to allow Novo Nordisk to fund and organize the event, whether or not the company - or anyone else on the panel - offered one-sided material or presentations.
The fundamental issue is whether it’s appropriate to allow a company to fund and organize such an event when it theoretically stands to benefit. As I indicated, I believe the answer is no.
If diabetes education is important enough to gain the attention of the convention organizers, they could have found another way to create the forum. Why do you have a problem with that notion?
Regards
ed
Podina
Ed,
I guess you answered my biggest concern and that is that you based your “editorial” on a WSJ reporter (who I also don’t think attended) who we assume spoke to someone at NN — you then expounded on that and in my opinion took it to a level of questioning the merits or wisdom of the organizers of UNITY on how they determine who and what companies should be permitted to provide funding? I could agrue that the media companies were more successful in self promotion than any others who were providing funding. Does that make it okay for them? Do they not have an agenda? They are owned by very large corporations and have a lot of influence on reporting! You have to ask the people at UNITY if they are faced with a limited resource pool? I am not so sure that there are many who will step up to the plate and fill the gap.
I for one am happy that Lilly, NN, and other non media companies underwrote programs as it added to the robustness of the conference. In my opinion.
I still don’t see why pharma underwriting costs to educate journalists provided they are “truly” unbranded and non biased is an issue? I certainly did not walk away with a feeling that I was “brainwashed” in any form that luncheon or Lilly’s plenary session.
I respect your opinion, but this is mine.
Ed Silverman
Hi Podina,
I focused on pharma because that’s what I do on this site. I did reach out to the Unity communications person, but still have not heard back.
I understand, of course, about limited resources, particularly with the newspaper industry undergoing turmoil. But idealistic as it may sound to some, I do think Unity should have tried to organize such a panel itself, and perhaps, could have reached out to experts already in the Chicago area. An appearance before dozens or hundreds of influential journalists is a good way to spend a couple of hours if you’re a researcher or specialist seeking a higher profile.
Again, I fully support educational panels at such gatherings. And I didn’t suggest anyone who attended the Novo Nordisk diabetes seminar was brainwashed. In my view, the issue is whether Unity wants to open the door to the potential for undue influence.
Cheers
ed