tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6976144462093297473.post1084513241747812452..comments2024-03-26T19:10:00.791-04:00Comments on West Coast Stat Views (on Observational Epidemiology and more): The increasingly self-serving ethics of journalismJosephhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10760453165301871031noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6976144462093297473.post-87821268137901697402012-07-10T21:55:55.521-04:002012-07-10T21:55:55.521-04:00It's an odd double standard but it's not u...It's an odd double standard but it's not unusual. Check out almost any media criticism and you'll kind similarly tortured ethical reasoning.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14705408455380402571noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6976144462093297473.post-37747506864343813222012-07-09T12:35:21.829-04:002012-07-09T12:35:21.829-04:00It is rather an odd double standard. It would be ...It is rather an odd double standard. It would be like saying it is wrong to sell cigarettes to children but it is fine to smoke them. <br /><br />The other issue here is that the decision to pass on information from an anonymous source is always tough. In a lot of cases sources will have agendas and not wanting to be named makes it impossible to clirify what that agenda might be.<br /><br />But we see none of that nuance in the story.Josephhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10760453165301871031noreply@blogger.com