Who's watching the watchdogs?

Financial ties between medical journalists and for-profit companies they cover in their reporting have received little attention in the media or from the research community. Such ties warrant scrutiny, not least because many of us first learn about new treatments from the news media, and these reports can affect the way the public uses health care. The media also affect medical practice by influencing the medical literature: journal articles that get media coverage are more likely to be subsequently cited, regardless of the article’s intrinsic value. To promote awareness and provoke debate we discuss three areas of “entanglement”: education of journalists, awards for journalists, and the actual practice of journalism. Education of journalists: training and further education of medical journalists should not be funded by the healthcare industries that the journalists cover, whether the education is delivered by universities or professional associations. Journalists’ awards: to avoid real or perceived conflicts of interest medical journalists should not accept from the healthcare industries they cover any awards, scholarships, gifts, travel, special treatment, or anything that could be seen as affecting what or how news is reported. The practice of journalism: just as medical journals require disclosure of conflicts of interest, medical journalists should disclose any financial or non-financial assistance from the industry in researching or writing their stories, including identifying quoted patients and experts with ties to the industry. Conflicts of interests of sources should routinely be disclosed. As researchers and writers acting to improve medical journalism, we encourage journalists, educators, and professional associations to scrutinise their own relations with the industry as intensely as they do those between doctors and drug companies and to develop workable solutions.