Easily Fakeable Questions
Industry-funded groups can frame questions to cast doubt on evidence that threatens their commercial interests. The source uses reporting and internal correspondence about the International Life Sciences Institute to illustrate why funding and incentives merit scrutiny.
THE IDEA
Easily Fakeable Questions
The source describes the International Life Sciences Institute as an industry-supported interest group founded in 1980 by a former Coca-Cola vice president. The group has embraced everything from minimizing the harmful effects of tobacco to casting doubt on dietary guidelines that tell people to consume less sugar.2 A New York Times report described the organization as “little more than a front group advancing the interests of the 400 corporate members that provide its $17 million budget.”3 Although the group claims it doesn’t lobby, memos obtained through the Freedom of Information Act tell a different story. The organization’s founder, Alex Malaspina, wrote his board of trustees asking for advice about how to get the head of the World Health Organization to soften her stance on sugar: “We must find a way to start a dialogue. . . . If not, she will continue to blast us with significant negative consequences on a global basis. This threat to our business is serious.”4 The authors present the correspondence as evidence that protecting industry interests formed part of the organization’s “business”.
When to use it
Evaluating controversies in public health debates, such as the impact of sugar or tobacco on health.
Analyzing corporate-funded research that questions climate change evidence.
Critical thinking in media literacy when encountering 'balancing' questions in news coverage.
Assessing the credibility of industry-sponsored studies or think tanks.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
Sugar Industry Front Group
The source describes corporate support for the International Life Sciences Institute and quotes correspondence seeking to soften the World Health Organization’s stance on sugar. This is a reason to examine how its public questions and claims relate to its funders’ interests.
Tobacco Industry Doubt
Similar tactics were used by the tobacco industry to question the link between smoking and cancer, creating fake debates to delay regulation.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
Think of a recent news story where a question was used to cast doubt on established science. Who benefits from raising that question?
When you hear a question like 'Is sugar really that bad?', consider the source and their funding. How might the question be designed to protect a particular interest?
How can you assess both the evidence behind a scientific question and the interests of the group promoting it? What would distinguish a genuine uncertainty from a manufactured controversy?
Often confused with
References
- New York Times article on the International Life Sciences Institute — Unknown (2015)
- Freedom of Information Act memos related to Alex Malaspina — Unknown (2016)
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- Verified How to Think Straight, Get Duped Less, and Make Better Decisions about What to Believe Online (Mike Caulfield, Sam Wineburg)