Editing Junk science (section)

==Misuse in public relations==
{{see|corporate communication|public relations}}
[[John Stauber]] and [[Sheldon Rampton]] of ''[[PR Watch]]'' say the concept of junk science has come to be invoked in attempts to dismiss scientific findings that stand in the way of short-term corporate profits. In their book ''[[Trust Us, We're Experts]]'' (2001), they write that industries have launched multimillion-dollar campaigns to position certain theories as junk science in the popular mind, often failing to employ the [[scientific method]] themselves. For example, the [[tobacco industry]] has described research demonstrating the harmful effects of smoking and [[Passive smoking|second-hand smoke]] as junk science, through the vehicle of various [[astroturfing|astroturf groups]].

Theories more favorable to corporate activities are portrayed in words as "sound science". Past examples where "sound science" was used include the research into the toxicity of [[Alar]], which was heavily criticized by antiregulatory advocates, and [[Herbert Needleman]]'s research into low dose [[lead poisoning]]. Needleman was accused of fraud and personally attacked.<ref name=Neff2005/>

[[Fox News]] commentator [[Steven Milloy]] often denigrates credible scientific research on topics like [[global warming]], [[ozone depletion]], and [[passive smoking]] as "junk science". The credibility of Milloy's website junkscience.com was questioned by [[Paul D. Thacker]], a writer for ''[[The New Republic]]'', in the wake of evidence that Milloy had received funding from [[Philip Morris USA|Philip Morris]], [[R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company|RJR Tobacco]], and [[ExxonMobil]].<ref name="tnr">[http://www.tnr.com/article/pundit-hire "Smoked Out: Pundit For Hire"], published in ''The New Republic'', accessed 24 November 2010.</ref><ref>{{cite news |first1=Sheldon |last1=Rampton |author-link1=Sheldon Rampton |first2=John |last2=Stauber |author-link2=John Stauber |url=http://www.prwatch.org/files/pdfs/prwatch/prwv7n3.pdf |title=How Big Tobacco Helped Create 'the Junkman' |volume=7 |issue=3 |work=PR Watch |date=2000 |publisher=[[Center for Media and Democracy]] |access-date=2023-12-24 |archive-date=2023-11-04 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231104063745/https://www.prwatch.org/files/pdfs/prwatch/prwv7n3.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="rjrmemo">[http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/syq70d00 Activity Report] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150113025048/http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/syq70d00 |date=2015-01-13 }}, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., December 1996; describes R.J.R. Tobacco's direct input into Milloy's junk science website. [http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/ Legacy Tobacco Documents Library] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150623173240/http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/ |date=2015-06-23 }} at the [[University of California, San Francisco]]. Accessed 5 October 2006.</ref> Thacker also noted that Milloy was receiving almost $100,000 a year in consulting fees from Philip Morris while he criticized the evidence regarding the hazards of [[second-hand smoke]] as junk science. Following the publication of this article, the [[Cato Institute]], which had hosted the junkscience.com site, ceased its association with the site and removed Milloy from its list of adjunct scholars.

Tobacco industry documents reveal that Philip Morris executives conceived of the "Whitecoat Project" in the 1980s as a response to emerging scientific data on the harmfulness of second-hand smoke.<ref name="whitecoat">[http://tobaccodocuments.org/landman/2063791182-1187.html Minutes of a meeting in which Philip Morris Tobacco discusses the inception of the "Whitecoat Project"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071013185238/http://tobaccodocuments.org/landman/2063791182-1187.html |date=2007-10-13 }}. Accessed 5 October 2006.</ref> The goal of the Whitecoat Project, as conceived by Philip Morris and other tobacco companies, was to use ostensibly independent "scientific consultants" to spread doubt in the public mind about scientific data through invoking concepts like junk science.<ref name="whitecoat"/> According to epidemiologist [[David Michaels (epidemiologist)|David Michaels]], Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment, Safety, and Health in the [[Clinton Administration]], the [[tobacco industry]] invented the "sound science" movement in the 1980s as part of their campaign against the regulation of [[second-hand smoke]].<ref>{{cite book  | last = Michaels  | first = David | title = Doubt is Their Product: How Industry's Assault on Science Threatens Your Health  | publisher =[[Oxford University Press]]| year = 2008  | location = New York  | isbn = 978-0195300673  | page = [https://archive.org/details/doubtistheirprod0000mich_x3g5/page/3 3]| title-link = Doubt is Their Product }}</ref>

David Michaels has argued that, since the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in ''[[Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.]]'', lay judges have become "gatekeepers" of scientific testimony and, as a result, respected scientists have sometimes been unable to provide testimony so that corporate defendants are "increasingly emboldened" to accuse adversaries of practicing junk science.<ref name=Michaels2005>{{cite journal | last= Michaels| first= David | year = 2005 | title = Scientific Evidence and Public Policy | url= http://www.ajph.org/cgi/content/full/95/S1/S5| journal =[[American Journal of Public Health]]| volume = 95 | issue = S1 | pages = 5–7 | doi = 10.2105/AJPH.2005.065599 | pmid = 16030339| hdl = 10.2105/AJPH.2005.065599 | hdl-access = free }}</ref>