This article was written
November 5, 2012 by National Public Radio its regarding publisher embargoes and
a mumps outbreak. This articles’ a little confusing, I think without a
journalism background or any knowledge of these ‘embargo’s you would have to
read it twice to really understand what it’s saying.
In
2009 there was a Mumps outbreak in many orthodox Jewish communities in and
around New York City. In order to combat its spreading doctors tried something
unusual and that was giving a third booster MMR vaccine to uninfected children
which would normally not be necessary. The
results were successful the mumps outbreak reduced by one quarter. Some argue
that it may have just been coincidently the end of the outbreak anyway and this
would have to be repeated in another outbreak to determine its success.
The
CDC wrote about the outbreak and its experimental vaccine trial but it took 3
years for the articles to emerge. The reason for this is an ‘embargo’ whenever
a scientist brings information to a publisher that is still unconfirmed in some
way the publisher must agree to not publish or speak of it. So why not just go
ahead and publish it? Supposedly the time gap is to give journalists more time
to research complex information. Some
argue that it is unnecessary and a silly power game that touts journalists as
gatekeepers to information. Policies regarding embargoes vary among publishers
but generally releasing content within an embargo category is grounds for punishment
by that scientist (or provider of information.) They punish publishers by withholding
future information. The exception where breaking an embargo is not frowned upon
is if the information is a public health concern. I found this article interesting
because I wasn’t aware of such a strange ritual within the publishing world.
No comments:
Post a Comment