Science, politics and policy in the minefield
By Amy Wallace
Originally appeared on ReportingOnHealth.org on August 30, 2010
Around 8 p.m. on the evening of Dec. 23, 2009, my 12-year-old son and I were puttering around the house when there was a sudden, loud banging at the front door.
“I have legal papers for Amy Wallace,” a brusque woman’s voice said from the other side of the door when I asked who was there. I was startled. The voice sounded unpleasant. It was dark out. It was the night before Christmas Eve. I didn’t feel like welcoming the voice in. Can you leave the papers outside, I asked? “Are you Amy Wallace?” barked the voice. “Uh,” I said, hesitating, my head muddy. Who was sending me legal papers?
“I’m going to take that as a yes!” the voice said, and not in a friendly way. “I saw you through the window. Consider yourself served!”
A little more than two months before, the November issue of Wired magazine had hit newsstands. The cover story was “An Epidemic of Fear: One Man’s Battle Against the Anti-vaccine Movement,” and I had written it. In part, the story was a profile of Dr. Paul Offit, the co-inventor of the rotavirus vaccine and a leading proponent of vaccines for children. But the story also painted a portrait of a passionate movement led by people who believe vaccines injure and kill children. And on Dec. 23, one of those people sued me, Dr. Offit and Conde Nast, the company that publishes Wired, for one million dollars.
We’ll get to the allegations of the suit in a second. But since I’m writing this for journalists, let me say this: getting sued for libel is just as big a bummer as you’ve always feared.
I’ve been a journalist for more than half my life. I have written for newspapers and magazines, I have been a reporter, an editor, a staff writer, an editor-at-large. Never before have I been a defendant. I am careful. I am meticulous. Above all, I work hard to be not just factual, but fair — to put bits of information in their proper context.
But here’s the simple truth: If someone wants to sue you, they can. Easily, too. And Barbara Loe Fisher, the cofounder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center in Vienna, Virginia, the largest, oldest, and most influential of the watchdog groups that oppose universal vaccination, wanted to sue me. So she did.
Challenge your assumptions
I’ve been asked to offer advice in this essay to those thinking of writing about vaccines. My basic advice is the same as I’d offer to people interested in covering public schools or Congress or the environment. Learn everything you can about the topic. (The resource guide posted on USC’s ReportingonHealth.org website is excellent in this regard). Challenge your own assumptions and be open to all points of view. Talk to lots of people and be willing to ask dumb questions. Then, take care to get every detail — big or small — right in print. And when I say right, I mean it in both the micro and macro sense. Context is everything.
But even as I ask you to bring the same rigor to every topic you choose, it must be acknowledged that writing about an emotionally charged issue like vaccines brings with it special challenges and is something to think carefully about. Like writing about abortion or animal rights, writing about vaccines inevitably raises the ire of certain readers. It is not for the timid. I’m not saying you have to be a fiery advocate. On the contrary. But you should go into the job with eyes open.
Autism’s False Prophets, Dr. Offit’s 2008 book, opened my eyes to the risks of reporting on vaccines. Before I began working on my Wired story I read it, focusing at first on his straightforward description of what being a vaccine advocate had cost him. He’d been vilified on the Internet as a profiteer, a prostitute who serviced Big Pharma, and worse. He’d been physically accosted. His life had been threatened. Once, an anonymous caller had even implied they might go after Offit’s two children.
This is great advice, and well-placed.
When I visited the website of Frontline after its excellent show on vaccines, I took away two experiences that together changed my view of the controversy:
1) I scanned the discussion forum, and read more comments than I’d like to recall expressing a consuming hatred of the vaccine establishment.
2) I took the on-line questionnaire exploring attitudes toward vaccination, and compared my responses to those of a randomly selected sample of Americans. The result? Overwhelmingly, Americans feel (just as I do) that vaccines are safe and effective in preventing a host of serious diseases.
The public are not as crazy as we might think from listening to a vocal handful, but the public discussion can become crazier if we let illogic dominate the conversation. It is very important that we keep pushing to maintain visibility for real science. Your writing is a vital part of this. Please keep doing what you’re doing.
Okay, next time I won’t try to italicize “Frontline.”
I have no idea what the following paragraph means. … And I think it is your writing style that betrays your wish that your readers will automatically understand your position. We don’t! That’s because, each of us (and you) are unique human beings.
“Do I regret my trip into the thicket? On the contrary. My Wired piece was a chance to contribute in a meaningful way to a discussion that must be had. The other day, a friend told me she’d heard about a mumps outbreak at a Los Angeles high school. Then, the morning that I finished writing this, the Los Angeles Times had a story about health officials’ worries that an East Coast mumps outbreak was spreading to L.A.”
Please take more time to clarify and spell out your thoughts, feelings with supporting facts. When you assume someone knows your message, you tend to fly through rhetoric. I think it’s natural.
I guess her point was that she is not lying. Perhaps you haven’t properly analyzed her statements.
Maybe next time you choose to publish someone is a liar, you will take time to check their side of the story.
You opted to pander to a man who is responsible for enlarging and grossly taxing infants body’s with vaccines and his own toxic cocktail vaccine. A vaccine that has a black lable on it per the FDA. Did Paul diclose that to you during your chat?
Probably not.
Parents making their own medical choices for their children only represent lack of vaccine sales.
I’ll treat the mumps, measles, and any other ‘vaccine preventable disease, naturally and effectively. The risks and lack of long term studies done on vaccines is terrifying and not a risk I am willing to put my children up for.
Beth Bento:
I hope, for your children’s sake, that your natural and effective treatments work better than your ability to write. That first paragraph was painful to read.
Oh, by the way, you are an idiot.