Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 03:51:32 -0500
Reply-To: DCHAS-L Discussion List <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU>
Sender: DCHAS-L Discussion List <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU>
From: Christopher Suznovich <snuz**At_Symbol_Here**MAC.COM>
Subject: Re: Eye protection in chemistry labs
In-Reply-To: <73929077-92C4-4A3E-837A-48735B3092B2**At_Symbol_Here**>

I would completely disagree that C&EN should not be held accountable fo r publishing ads with poor safety practices or any type of misleading inform ation.  Just because C&EN is a ‘trade’ publication, the editors still hold the responsibilities that every other editors of other p ublications whether they are in print or electronic and are newspapers, jour nals, trade or public.

The editors are the ones who are responsible for content choices.  Whi le I agree no one is perfect, if the editors are publishing information that is wrong/misleading, it should be brought to their attention so it can be c orrected.  I also think in this case since C&EN is a publication re presenting all of us plus the thousands of other chemists, and as paying sub scribers to such publication, we have a right to comment on the content and can object to content and advertising in the publication in a proper manner.

If we remember within the past few years similar issues have come up where there content of publications/media has been an issue.  For example, on e nationally known newspaper published comics that were questionable and the re was public outcry.  The loudest outcry was directed at the newspaper s and the editors for deciding to publish the comics since the editors has t he choice of not running the comic and choosing another one in its place- no t at the author who wrote the comic. When Dan Rather  admitted that som e of the news on the ‘Evening News’ may have been misleading, he said it was his fault that the information was released because he was the final reviewer/editor of the information he delivered on his show and he sho w have checked the background on it more carefully. Several years ago the FC C required all TV shows to be rated similarly to movies for their content. & nbsp;This was due to the public asking for the TV stations to inform us what the content of the show was- the writers, directors, and producers do not a ssign these ratings.

Even in our own peer review process, there is an editor over-seeing the pro cess through to publication. And in the rare event that a published journal article is found to have been comprised from falsified or questionable resea rch, the journal in most cases will retract that article, or if it not been published, it will be returned to the author(s)- the article is not left to stand  published or be pushed forward with a simple shame on you letter s sent to the article author(s).  Such practices also uphold integrity to publications.

Chris Suznovich

From: List Moderator <ecgrants**At_Symbol_Here**UVM.EDU>
Reply-To: DCHAS-L Discussion List <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**>
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2010 14:18:42 -0500
To: <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU>< BR> Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Eye protection in chemistry labs

From: "NEAL LANGERMAN" <neal**At_Symbol_Here**>
Date: January 7, 2010 12:07:32 PM EST
Subject: RE: [DCHAS-L] Eye protection in chemistry labs

While I concur with Larry’s intent and shar e the concern for not advertising unsafe practices, I strongly oppose direct ing the energy of this group at C&EN.  That publication is extremel y careful to review its editorial content for safe practices.  It has t aken effort on the part of many of us to achieve this and C&EN is not pe rfect, but they are doing very well.  Further, when they have a questio n, they come to CHAS/CCS for guidance.
The content of advertising lies in the hands of the advertiser.  If AB C Chemical Company publishes an advertisement depicting unsafe practices, ou r efforts should be aimed at improving ABC Chemical Company.  In the ca se cited by Larry, CHAS wrote directly to the CEO of the company.
It is easy to find out the name, address and email of a CEO – the out cry of this group should be targeted there; not at the messenger.
---------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
The information contained in th is message is privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communicati on in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and del eting it from your computer.

7563 CONVOY Ct
(858) 874 5577 (phone, 24/7)
(858) 874 8239 (FAX) <>

Previous post   |  Top of Page   |   Next post

The content of this page reflects the personal opinion(s) of the author(s) only, not the American Chemical Society, ILPI, Safety Emporium, or any other party. Use of any information on this page is at the reader's own risk. Unauthorized reproduction of these materials is prohibited. Send questions/comments about the archive to
The maintenance and hosting of the DCHAS-L archive is provided through the generous support of Safety Emporium.