Jodine,
You state , "It is true that trusted, credible "third parties" can deliver
the most believable information."

As an example of this you state that the formula industry in the Chicago
newspaper article is supported with third-party commentary by Dr. Richard
Deckelbaum, director of the Institute of Human Nutrition at Columbia
University and chair of the Institute of Medicine committee.  One might
assume that by his titles that he is an unbiased member of the medical
community and obviously high up there.  But a good investigative reporter
would have found out rather quickly (took me 2 minutes) that Dr. Richard
Deckelbaum is an invited lecturer for Nestle/considered affiliated with
Nestle, also a receipient of unrestricted grants from Bristol Myers (Mead
Johnson), and has an interest in Slim Fast.
http://www.pcrm.org/news/lawsuit-cofi.html

Balanced reporting?  You state that Susan Carlson, professor of nutrition at
the University of Kansas, because of her less than enthusiastic expert
comment is considered a positive because she, too boosts credibility. But
then again maybe her less than enthusiastic response to Marsha's message has
to do more with the fact that her studies  are credited by her university as
contributing to the introduction of DHA supplementation in infant formula for
Ross (Similiac Advance and Mead Johnson (Lipil).  She is listed at one
Japanese web site as "supported" by Martek
Bioscience Boulder Corporation.  Now I am not sure whether something has been
lost in the translation from Japanese to English and that support means
something other than what I suspect.

I think this information buts a whole different light on the article.  This
article is not about balanced reporting.  It's either sloppy reporting--the
journalist not doing the homework.  Or its deliberate omission of important
information, in order not to rock the boat of an important industry.

You wrote about a journalist's desire to present balanced reporting.  I guess
I am "old school" because I thought getting the facts straight were far more
important than achieving a balance.  And obviously, this article was omitting
some important facts that the reader ought to know.

 Is balanced reporting a desire of the journalist or a desire of the editor,
who may feel pressured by industries to present a certain picture of a
particular industry?  Nothing in life is perfectly balanced.  I think the
desire for balance is a way of avoiding issues that might make some
industries very, very unhappy.

I think you are right about hidden bias and the potential for outrage and the
diminishing of credibility.  The article from the Chicago newspaper in light
of the information I have shared should make some people on this list
somewhat outraged.

I guess I no longer find news coverage to be more credible than advertising.
Industries and the government have just made the news another form of
advertising propaganda.  I don't read much of it and believe far less than I
read.
Valerie W. McClain, IBCLC





             ***********************************************

To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or digest)
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
All commands go to [log in to unmask]

The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html