On the popular Romenesko media news blog, we learn of a company offering to pay journalists who republish the company’s news release.
Romenesko writes that the offer letter begins:
Dear Editor or Health Editor:
Would you consider running our press release as a win-win project? We will pay $100 for every Skin Care Patient who sees the press release in your newspaper and commits to our exclusive and effective process. We monitor each incoming patient and where they heard about us.
The letter goes on to promote the product’s alleged ability to “cure” a variety of skin disorders.
The editor in Virginia who forwarded this letter to Romenesko wrote:
“[I’d] be curious to see where this press release is run, given the inducement.”
I’d like to offer a $100 reward to anyone who can find an example of a news organization that publishes the news release.
But, alas, I can’t afford to pay the reward.
If only the public saw more of what special interests do to try to influence health news coverage….
Opinions on other issues in news, journals, PR, advertising, marketing
The tale of two “negative” studies. Or, how spin is applied to make research findings look more impressive. A must read. https://johnmandrola.substack.com/p/the-tale-of-two-negative-studies
The @nytimes chose to interview one of the editors of the @AnnalsofIM (publisher of this paper) who "gushed with extraordinary glee: It’s huge! There are very few things that reduce your mortality by 30%."
Turns out coffee is not one of those few things despite all that glee. https://twitter.com/garyschwitzer/status/1533202075928215558
Comments
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
ivan Oransky
May 4, 2011 at 12:57 pmTell you what, Gary. I’ll fund your reward. I’ll donate $100 to AHCJ on behalf of the first person who finds this release somewhere.
Ivan Oransky
Executive Editor, Reuters Health
Treasurer, AHCJ
Larry Husten
May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pmIn response to Gary’s question on twitter whether this is the sleaziest PR pitch ever:
Not even close. As sleazy as this is, it has the virtue of being honest and extremely precise. We know exactly what we’re dealing with here. I wish the same was true for so many of the other PR pitches I get. I’ll take this one any day.
Frederik Joelving
May 5, 2011 at 2:17 pmI’m at a loss for words… While I’d like to see Ivan hand over $100, I doubt it’s going to happen. Let’s see if I’m naive.
Frederik Joelving
Reporter, Reuters Health
lisa
May 9, 2011 at 10:08 amIt reads like one of those infamous “Nigerian scam” emails. I wonder if anyone has tried to call the phone number in the press release to see who answers.
The Ethicator
May 10, 2011 at 2:54 pmYou forgot to include the address of the people offering the inducement.
Hypothetically speaking, if a well-known bioethics thought leader were to post this on his own blog and then turn himself in, would you still offer the $100? Thank you.
The Ethicator
http://www.whitecoatblackhat.com/category/ethicator/
Our Comments Policy
But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.
You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.
This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.
We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.
There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”
The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:
We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.
And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.
The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.
You might also like