logo
Published on Center for Media and Democracy (http://www.prwatch.org)

Journalistic Malpractice at WSYR-9

On December 26, 2005, WSYR-9 [1]—the Clear Channel [2] ABC affiliate in Syracuse, New York—ran a 90-second story on chondroitin sulfate, a dietary supplement made from animal cartilage that's marketed as an over-the-counter pain remedy for arthritis. While trumpeting chondroitin sulfate as a "major health breakthrough," the segment included positive testimony from Jason Matley, a 30-year old arthritis patient, and Nicholas DiNubile, an orthopedic surgeon. The story cited the results of a major National Institutes of Health (NIH) study that suggested certain supplements—including chondroitin sulfate—were effective in relieving knee joint pain.

What WSYR-9 failed to disclose is that the story was actually funded by Bioibérica [3], a Spanish chemical company who—by no coincidence—is a major international supplier of chondroitin sulfate. Biobérica hired D S Simon Productions [4] to produce and distribute a news-like story about the effectiveness of their product.

WSYR-9 adopted the VNR as their own work, editing it for length, inserting station-branded text overlays, and enlisting their own health reporter, Carrie Lazarus [5], to introduce and narrate the story as if she had researched it herself.

If Lazarus actually had looked at the data from the NIH study [6] (PDF), her reporting didn't reflect it. According to the NIH, chondroitin sulfate, when taken alone, barely outperformed a placebo. The video news release [7] (VNR) cherry-picked and skewed the NIH results, which indicated that a combination of supplements showed some promising results among a subgroup of arthritics.

But even if she were bad with numbers, Lazarus could have done a simple news search on chondroitin sulfate, which would have taken her straight to a Washington Post article [8] from November 22. In it, reporter Elizabeth Agnvall quotes Daniel Clegg, the head of the NIH study, as saying:

The first take-home message is that in the overall study population, none of the supplements were better than placebo[.]

Sadly, Lazarus and her colleagues at WSYR-9 neglected to do even basic research on the story they were airing. Not only did they deceive their audience with a well-disguised corporate advertisement, they failed to provide the proper context and balance that comes from bonafide journalism.

In February 2006, D S Simon released an updated version [9] of the VNR on behalf of Bioibérica. It was adopted by two stations that, unlike WSYR-9, used the material to build stories that were critical of chondroitin sulfate.

To see the original Bioibérica VNR as well as the WSYR-9 newscast, click on the Quicktime links below.

Next: A San Francisco station gets Exuberant over Pfizer [10]
Back to VNR Findings [11]



Source URL:
http://www.prwatch.org/node/4552