Example of a Press Release (and Study ) I'm Skeptical Of

This just in...

Shortly after I sent out a Writer’s Guide post today about problems with press releases, I ran across a new press release that looked like a no-brainer for me to use as a springboard for a story that’s been on my to-do list for some time, about whether it’s healthy to hit the snooze button. The thrust of the release:

Around 45% of study subjects hit the snooze button on more than 80% of mornings. These heavy users snoozed, on average, 20 minutes a day.

The release is well-crafted, has good quotes, the study looked legit at first blush, and the lead author works in the Division of Sleep and Circadian Disorders Medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital.

All good so far.

I spent about 15 minute setting up a draft, writing a working headline and penning a few preliminary words while the idea was fresh, before I dug in. Then I realized the data might not representative of the population, so I dug deeper into the language of the study. To begin with, I did one important thing I always do: I searched “funding” and …

Screeeeeeeech!

I never even found out who funded the study, because the search-on-page led to the “Competing interests” section, which starts like this…

Dr. Robbins reports consulting fees from Oura Ring Ltd., Savoir Beds Ltd., byNacht GmbH, Hilton Hotels International, Sonesta Hotels International, The Institute for Healthier Living Abu Dhabi. Dr. Robbins is on the Medical Advisory Board to Oura Ring, Equinox Fitness Clubs, and Somnum Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Czeisler reports grants and/or contracts from American Academy of Sleep Medicine Foundation, Axsome Therapeutics, CDC Foundation, Delta Airlines, Guidehouse, Inc., Jazz Pharmaceuticals…

… and goes on and on. The above is about 20% of it! Now, Dr. Robbins and collaborators might’ve done a fine job on this study. But as a journalist, there is no way I can get past the reasons they might have chosen to conduct the study, the results they might’ve hoped to find, and therefore how they conducted it. I’m not accusing them of anything, but all of us humans have biases, and taking our bias out of our decision-making is not easy. The study might be extremely well done, all on the up-and-up, but writers are reasonable to be skeptical, and for me the competing interests are a brick wall.

As an editor, I ask writers to include funding sources, whenever possible (because government sources and other objective funders deserve some credit, too). My message today is to also mention potential conflicts of interest beyond direct funding. Or, as I’m doing here, shuffle along to the next story idea.

Cheers,
Rob