Cookie Control

This site uses cookies to store information on your computer.

Some cookies on this site are essential, and the site won't work as expected without them. These cookies are set when you submit a form, login or interact with the site by doing something that goes beyond clicking on simple links.

We also use some non-essential cookies to anonymously track visitors or enhance your experience of the site. If you're not happy with this, we won't set these cookies but some nice features of the site may be unavailable.

By using our site you accept the terms of our Privacy Policy.

(One cookie will be set to store your preference)
(Ticking this sets a cookie to hide this popup if you then hit close. This will not store any personal information)

When News Embargoes May Endanger Public Health

November 14, 2012

Last month NPR's David Schultz reported about a 2009 outbreak of mumps among Orthodox Jewish communities in and around New York City. Many of the children who got sick had received the standard two-shot immunization. The New York Department of Public Health and the federal Centers for Disease Control tried giving a third shot to children who hadn't yet gotten sick.

But when Schultz wanted to report on whether the extra vaccinations had worked, and whether there were any side effects, he couldn't. He ran up against an embargo imposed by the journal Pediatrics. When articles ran in two other journals, Schultz was able to report on the outbreak and the extra vaccinations. But he could not answer an obvious question: Did the extra vaccinations work? Only after Pediatrics ran the article in question was he able to later report the results.

If you worry about how embargoes affect journalists' access, you may want to follow Embargo Watch, by Ivan Oransky, executive editor at Reuters Health.

SEJ Publication Types: 
Topics on the Beat: 
Visibility: