Corruption & Manipulation in a GM Story

Handling of a recent story about GM crops and health raised questions about science writing, integrity, and skepticism. Science journalists called out some of their colleagues and those who tried (and, in some cases, managed) to manipulate them. Lots of discussion of this case among science writers. Other folks may find the tale interesting as well.

First a link to Deborah Blum's post at Knight Science Journalism Tracker:

"A rancid, corrupt way to report about science"
Top of the story:

The quote in the headline on this post comes from Carl Zimmer's blog, The Loom, in a commentary on coverage of recent European study on possible health effects of eating GM crops. To give you the short version, the study authors appear to have practiced some very questionable science and some - and cynical - manipulation of the science media.

And then the story as outlined very briefly by Ed Yong in this week's "Missing Links" post at Not Exactly Rocket Science:

Lots of panicked headlines this week about GM-corn that supposedly led to tumours in lab rodents. The study’s incredibly weak – here’s an incisive analysis by SciCurious and another good one by Deborah Mackenzie at New Scientist. And here’s the real headline: reporters were prevented from even seeking outside opinions about the paper. Not only weak science but an absurd use of the embargo system.