Scienceblogs adds PepsiCo-sponsored blog, sparks debate
Hard on the heels of adding institutional blogs Scienceblogs now has Food Frontiers, a blog sponsored by PepsiCo, sparking discussion and concern.
They’re not entirely happy discussions either:
Janet D. Stemwedel’s Welcome to inescapable conflict of interest is a good starting point. As usual she is excellent on moral issues and points out that it seems that it is their R&D scientists that will be blogging, rather than the PR staff, but also that they are tied to their sponsor and so have a conflict of interest (COI).
PalMD chimes in with Rethinking blog networks and ethics, worrying particularly about possible effects of being associated with PepsiCo through sharing the same platform. He also wonders if this impacts on their indexing in Google News. (Our blogs are also indexed on Google News.)
GrrlScientist titled her post more bluntly*: Pepsi Ethics. Leaving aside her objections about linking a nutrition blog and PepsiCo, she points to a distinction between research institute blogs and corporations (they have products to sell).
Mark Chu-Carroll (aka Mark-CC) joins in with Seed, Conflicts of Interest, and Sleaze
This is rapidly spreading elsewhere, as you might expect. Many are in ’I’ll give it a chance, but I’ll be watching very closely’ mode. In general, the bloggers seem at best wary and at worse disgusted.
I suspect that the owner of Scienceblogs, Seed Media Group, is not going to be able to easily play this one down. (It has to be noted that they are a business, too.)
My initial thoughts are that they’re (in danger of) breaking the independence of content that is a key to blogs in general, and science blogs in particular.
Blogs tied tightly to corporations belong on corporate websites, in my opinion, where the conflict is inherent and expected.
At least they did disclose the COI in their opening post, in the opening sentence, so it’s not as if they are hiding anything:
On behalf of the team here at ScienceBlogs, I’d like to welcome you to Food Frontiers, a new project presented by PepsiCo.
I have no objections to food science blogs – we have Amanda Johnson’s Food Stuff – but care needs to be taken with conflicts of interest.
A lot will come down the content they offer. Much more than for the institutional blogs, readers and fellow sciblings will be wary of anything that looks like PR material.
We all have COIs to varying extents.
For the bloggers in Food Frontiers – as a first impression – it seems hard to see how their posts will not have a COI, unless they were to write off-topic.
Advertising on scienceblogs isn’t new, but there is a concern the introduction of a corporate-sponsored blog has crossed a line. At least advertising is (more-or-less) independent of the content; this new move is much closer to the content.
In principle, they could place blogs with affiliations that imply an inherent COI in a separate section. While this might help make the distinction clearer it could create a permanent rift, both virtual and real.
As a final remark, it does make me think (not for the first time) that those running blog collectives are wise to let their bloggers know their plans in advance rather than foist things on them, with communication to answer any question about the details ahead of time.
It seems clear to me that none of the bloggers were aware that this was to take place. I can’t help thinking a more informed introduction might have helped.
Share your thoughts in the comments.
[Edited to correct a typo.]
* Changed to reflect GrrScientist’s new title for the post.
Other articles on Code for life:
Boney lumps, linkage analysis and whole genome sequencing
0 Responses to “Scienceblogs adds PepsiCo-sponsored blog, sparks debate”
If anyone is looking for an easy(-ish) way to find all the other commentary, try either @BoraZ twitter stream or check the #scibloxymoron hash-tag out on twitter.
As you might expect, it’s commented about all over the place… There are good snippets of thinking in most of the blogs posts or comments that follow.
There are a very large number of posts on this! One that readers should read is from the Scienceblogs “overlords”, “Transparency regarding Food Frontiers:
http://scienceblogs.com/seed/2010/07/transparency_regarding_food_fr.php
There’s coverage on the Guardian’s website:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2010/jul/07/scienceblogs-blogging-pepsi
including this now not confidential letter sent to sciencebloggers by Adam Bly head of Seed Media Group):
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/jul/07/scienceblogs-blogging-pepsi-bly-letter
A number of the sciencebloggers have declared themselves on temporary furlough in response.
Science writer Brian Switek (aka Laelaps) looking to move on, as are several others (e.g. David Dobbs, Blake Stacey). Or at least that is their initial intention. Perhaps the tweaks the “overlords” apply will put things right? (I have to admit I’m not holding my breath.)
Rebbeca Skloots (author of the best-selling The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks) has decided to move on. At least one blogger is saying that boycotting is chickening out.
A comment I read *somewhere* from a journalist writing in the comments to one of these many posts, was to the effect it is a media rule of thumb of always make sure the advertising and the content are totally separate or you lose the trust of your readers.
Anyway… it’s enough to make your head spin. Sad to watch too.
As if there aren’t already enough leads to follow…
Carl Zimmer, formerly at scienceblogs but now at Discover, adds his thoughts and a list of bloggers on the move:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2010/07/07/oh-pepsi-what-hath-thou-wrought/
A RSS feed for the blogs that are leaving has been set up, see Coyote Crossing for details:
http://faultline.org/index.php/site/item/scienceblogs_diaspora_rss_feed
Knight science journalism tracker elaborates on the point of separating advertising from content:
http://ksjtracker.mit.edu/2010/07/07/scienceblogs-trashes-its-bloggers-credibility/
A journalist at scienceblogs weighs in with related thoughts:
http://scienceblogs.com/superbug/2010/07/pepsi_messy.php
More related thoughts from former editor-in-chief of a science magazine:
http://johnrennie.net/2010/07/07/teetering-chinese-wall-falls-on-scienceblogs/
Enough? Yup. I think I’m done on this one. There is way too much being said for anything I say now to mean much. (Not that anything I say ever means much…)
As if things couldn’t get quirkier… I’ll let you make of this what you will:
http://phylogenomics.blogspot.com/2010/07/pz-myers-will-reveal-his-decision-on.html
It opens:
“For the final act of the drama that has captured the imagination of science blogging fans around the world, PZ Myers of Pharyngula plans to announce his decision live on the Discovery Channel at 9 on Thursday night.â€
[Do take note of the bottom line.]
[…] at scienceblog’s pulldown list of blogs, indeed it is gone. For the back story, see my earlier post in this drama and comments I have added that point to other […]
[…] Scienceblogs adds PepsiCo-sponsored blog, sparks debate | Code for …PepsiCo at ScienceBlogs | The Decision Tree […]
[…] Grant Jacobs Grant Jacobs […]
[…] has been the scene of a lot of activity over the last year or two. I even commented at one point that it might have become something less […]