Respected keyboard comrades!
The result of my EurekAlert! auditing was the termination of my
account. And this was for reasons that changed when I challenged the
action.
I can understand why EurekAlert! restricts access to embargoed
material to bone fide journalists. But the rules appear to be
prejudiced against freelances.
As a freelance writer and editor I work for a number of different
clients, some of whom are competitors. As well as science reporting, I
occasionally do some copywriting and editing for clients who have
nothing to do with science communication. The latter may not be
journalism, but in practice there is no conflict of interest. All the
freelance journalists I know personally are in a similar position.
This is how we make a living.
EurekAlert! cites restrictions arising from the US Securities Exchange
Act. But the justification/s given for my account termination are
spurious, and, as I said, the reasons changed in response to my
questioning.
At first the messages from EurekAlert! called into question my
professional integrity, effectively accusing me of an conflict of
interest by undertaking consultancy work. That was before I became a
journalist proper, when I was still semi-attached to the European
space industry. I have never reported on the space industry.
I was then told that a Google search revealed no bylined articles by
me since I stopped writing online opinion rubbish for the Grauniad
back in September '07. Assuming that Google knows about everything
that exists displays an astounding level of ignorance. B2B publishers,
for example, rarely publish openly on the Internet; their business
models are based on the distribution of information to mainly
corporate paying subscribers. In many cases you will not even find
tables of contents published on the web. The relevance of bylines is
not immediately apparent to me.
I was kicked off EurekAlert! by editorial coordinator Jennifer Gibson,
who had the nerve to sign-off "Warm regards, Jenn". This followed an
extensive trawling of my website from the aaaa.org domain, with, it
appears, a particular interest in some of the more political blog posts.
I phoned our Jenn to ask what was going on. Pregnant pauses ...
errs ... more pauses ... hesitant explanations ... blah. Ms Gibson
then gave me the contact details for her supervisor, Rahman Culver, to
whom I outlined my concerns in a email. I concluded by saying that the
various explanations given for my account termination indicate to me a
lack of candidness on EurekAlert!'s part.
A day later Culver replied, apologising for "any miscommunication",
and backtracking somewhat on the aspersions cast on my professional
integrity.
Culver then explained EurekAlert! policy as regards the credentials of
journalists granted access to embargoed material...
"[P]lease understand that journalists with access to embargoed news on
our Web site must work exclusively for entities owned and operated
independently of any government, industry, educational institution,
association or lobbying organization.
"As you indicated, your professional work is not limited exclusively
to science journalism. Your work with various third sector
organizations and corporate clients (the fact that this work is not
directly related to journalism is precisely the point), precludes you
from having access to embargoed news content as outlined by our
policies. These policies, developed in consult with EurekAlert!'s
external advisors, exist to operate in adherence to established US
government S.E.C. guidelines, and are enforced strictly by our staff."
Culver is now appealing to the authority of EurekAlert! director
Patrick McGuiness.
There are a number of problems with Culver's explanation.
For one, Eurekalert! has a de facto monopoly in North America as a
clearing house for embargoed science press releases. Now I tend to
regard the embargo system as inherently harmful to science, if not
downright corrupting. But like all journalists I have no choice but to
work with it, and adhere strictly to the rules. By refusing certain
journalists access to the database of embargoed material, EurekAlert!
is putting us at a competitive disadvantage as journalists.
As for independence from government, industry, the education sector
and lobby groups, the AAAS by its very nature works across these
boundaries, and is dependent on all the sectors listed. There is no
"independence", only a responsibility to act with due professionalism
and impartiality. That the AAAS does, just as the BA does on this side
of the Pond.
I see that Kat Arney has also been expelled from EurekAlert!, though
this doesn't surprise me, given what Culver and Gibson have said. It's
still wrong, in my opinion, and reflects badly on the AAAS and the
embargo system. I imagine that the only science journalists who can
fulfil all the stated criteria for membership of the EurekAlert!
community are full-time staffers working for major newspapers,
magazines and broadcasters. If so, that is discriminatory and anti-
competitive.
Francis
--
Dr Francis Sedgemore
journalist and science writer
http://sedgemore.com
**********************************************************************
1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example,
send an email to mailto:[log in to unmask] with the following message:
set psci-com nomail -- [include hyphens]
2. To resume email from the list, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the message:
set psci-com mail -- [include hyphens]
3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the message:
leave psci-com -- [include hyphens]
4. Further information about the psci-com discussion list, including list archive, can be found at the list web site: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html
5. The psci-com gateway to internet resources on science communication and science and society can be found at http://psci-com.ac.uk
6. To contact the Psci-com list owner, please send an email to mailto:[log in to unmask]
**********************************************************************
|
