los angeles times retracts and corrects

Los Angeles Times Retracts and Corrects Story on Roger Clemens' Use of

Steroids and Apologizes: Tobacco Control Groups Should Take Note

The Los Angeles Times yesterday retracted its October 1, 2006 story

which had reported that pitcher Jason Grimsley named former teammate

Roger Clemens as someone who had used performance-enhancing drugs. In

the actual affidavit, which was unsealed Thursday, Grimsley did not,

in fact, name Clemens.

In response to the unsealing of the affidavit, the Los Angeles Times

immediately retracted its original story, corrected it, and

apologized. In fact, the paper ran its corrected story on the front

page.

This retraction in no way clears Clemens of wrongdoing, since he is

named in former Senator George Mitchell's report as a player who at

one point used illegal steroids to enhance his performance. Clemens

has vehemently denied that allegation.

The Rest of the Story

In many ways, this is an appropriate way for me to bring the 2007 year

of The Rest of the Story to an end. This story has a very simple

message: organizations do, from time to time, make mistakes. They do

occasionally make inaccurate statements. But when that happens and the

truth is brought to their attention, they do -- if they are

responsible, are concerned about their credibility, and have some

integrity -- retract the inaccurate information, correct it, and

apologize for the error.

In 2007, The Rest of the Story has brought to the attention of many

anti-smoking groups a large number of inaccurate, deceptive, or highly

misleading scientific statements. With just a few exceptions, the

anti-smoking groups and prominent researchers and advocates have not

only ignored the truth and failed to correct their mis-statements, but

in some cases they have instead attacked me and questioned my

character.

I hope that the New Year is a time of reflection for the anti-smoking

groups, and that they will come out in 2008 by following the lead set

by the Los Angeles Times in the Clemens case: acknowledge their

mistakes, correct them, and apologize for deceiving and misleading the

public.

The problem is that what motivates organizations to act in this

ethical way is: (1) a sense of public responsibility; (2) a concern

for their credibility in the future; and (3) a degree of scientific

integrity.

So far, the failure of anti-smoking groups to respond appropriately to

the mistakes they have made suggests, unfortunately, the absence of

these qualities.

In the pages of The Rest of the Story, the affidavit has been

unsealed: many anti-smoking organizations have been named in the

unethical (although not illegal) use of deceptive and misleading

propaganda in order to pursue their (in some cases fanatical) policy

agenda.

Just as this is now the time for Major League Baseball to respond to

the Mitchell report in order to save itself, its reputation, and its

integrity, this is now the time for tobacco control to respond to The

Rest of the Story in order to preserve its own reputation and

integrity.

Will 2008 represent a year of change, a year in which the anti-smoking

groups come to terms with this unethical and inappropriate behavior?

Or will it simply be more of the same: do not address the substance of

the "Siegel report," just attack him, his credibility, his character,

and his motives?

Based on the actions of anti-smoking groups and leaders in 2007, I

have a little more hope that Major League Baseball will address its

rampant steroid problem than that tobacco control will address its

scientific integrity problem.

But this is the turn of a new year, and I am willing to forget the