Might it not be possible to compromise?  I think we are all in agreement on the importance of safety.

No one would discourage safe practices.  No one would disagree that these are tight economic times and advertising income is necessary for the publication of the worthwhile journal in question.  As such, C&EN needs to publish the ads that it can.  (Has anyone complained about the colorful contents of the flasks or the luminous flames on the Bunsen burners?)

Would it be possible for C&EN to run a disclaimer under offending ads along the lines of “This advertisement may depict unsafe laboratory procedures” or something to that effect? 

Ben Ruekberg

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

The editors are the ones who are responsible for content choices.  While 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 corrected.  I also think in this case since C&EN is a publication representing all of us plus the thousands of other chemists, and as paying subscribers 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, one nationally known newspaper published comics that were questionable and there was public outcry.  The loudest outcry was directed at the newspapers and the editors for deciding to publish the comics since the editors has the choice of not running the comic and choosing another one in its place- not at the author who wrote the comic. When Dan Rather  admitted that some 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 show have checked the background on it more carefully. Several years ago the FCC required all TV shows to be rated similarly to movies for their content.  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 assign these ratings.

Even in our own peer review process, there is an editor over-seeing the process through to publication. And in the rare event that a published journal article is found to have been comprised from falsified or questionable research, 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 letters 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**list.uvm.edu>
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2010 14:18:42 -0500
To: <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU>
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Eye protection in chemistry labs

From: "NEAL LANGERMAN" <neal**At_Symbol_Here**chemical-safety.com>
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 share the concern for not advertising unsafe practices, I strongly oppose directing the energy of this group at C&EN.  That publication is extremely careful to review its editorial content for safe practices.  It has taken effort on the part of many of us to achieve this and C&EN is not perfect, but they are doing very well.  Further, when they have a question, they come to CHAS/CCS for guidance.
 
The content of advertising lies in the hands of the advertiser.  If ABC Chemical Company publishes an advertisement depicting unsafe practices, our efforts should be aimed at improving ABC Chemical Company.  In the case 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 outcry of this group should be targeted there; not at the messenger.
 
nl
 
-------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------
The information contained in this 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 communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.

NEAL LANGERMAN
ADVANCED CHEMICAL SAFETY, Inc.
7563 CONVOY Ct
SAN DIEGO CA 92111
(858) 874 5577 (phone, 24/7)
(858) 874 8239 (FAX)
www.chemical-safety.com <http://www.chemical-safety.com/< /a>>