All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
June 30, 2007 - Skeptoid
11:47
Skeptoid #52: Science Magazines Violating Their Own Missions

Science magazines continue to undermine themselves by publishing ads for pseudoscientific products. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Science Mag Ads for Male Enhancement 00:05:26
Why is it that when you turn to the back pages of a science magazine, you find ads for flagrantly unscientific products?
Doesn't this seem to be a violation of that magazine's mission?
It's certainly annoying and backwards, but the unfortunate fact is that even a science magazine has to fulfill another mission as well, to stay in business.
This dilemma is today on Skeptoid.
A quick reminder for everyone, you're listening to Skeptoid, revealing the true science and true history behind urban legends every week since 2006.
With over a thousand episodes, we're celebrating 20 years of keeping it focused and keeping it brief.
And we couldn't have done it without your curiosity leading the way.
And now we're even offering a little bit more.
If you become a premium member, supporting the show with a monthly micropayment of as little as $5, you get more Skeptoid.
The premium version of the show is not only ad-free, it has extended content.
These episodes are a few minutes longer.
We get rid of the ads and replace them with more Skeptoid.
The Extended Premium Show available now.
Come to Skeptoid.com and click Go Premium.
You're listening to Skeptoid.
I'm Brian Dunning from Skeptoid.com.
Science magazines violating their own missions.
Today we're going to sit back with our favorite science magazine, open a cold beverage, and read outrageous pseudoscience claims.
How's that?
Have they lost their editorial way?
Not quite.
They've lost control of their advertising departments.
I've been a reader of popular publications like Scientific American and Popular Science for many years.
I enjoy the articles, but I always have to deliberately avoid the last pages where they tend to run advertisements for blatantly pseudoscientific products.
Aphrodisiacs, herbal supplements, magic jewelry, and the like.
Now, obviously, popular science has to make money, and advertising is one way they do that.
If their hands were completely tied and they tried to be too restrictive about what types of ads they run, they might not make the money they need.
Even skeptical readers like me would rather see them in business than out of it, so we should probably allow them the leeway they need to make the money they need.
Right?
Well, maybe.
It's a give and take.
The more bogus ads they run, the more it cuts into their credibility.
These publications put themselves out there as proponents of scientific advances, and when they publish even third-party materials that run counter to this mission, they're contributing to society's built-in adhesion to the dark ages.
I contacted Popular Science's advertising department and asked for their advertising guidelines.
I wasn't able to get anything on paper, but I did get a verbal instruction that the products they advertised must actually work and must do what the ad says they do.
Okay, interesting.
Let's open popular science and see if the advertised products are truly evidenced to do what they claim.
Here's an anti-aging supplement on page 90 that will make you look and feel younger, stronger, perform better, and recover faster.
Plus, it's lab-tested and highest-rated.
Apparently, that's good enough for popular science.
On another page I find a trust potion.
It's a spray that compels others to trust you and fuels intimacy.
A trust potion, popular science.
Shouldn't this be your cover story?
Can we get an article about this?
Obviously you must agree that it does what it claims.
I actually did find one ad for a useless product that says as required that its statements have not been evaluated by the FDA, but only one.
And my understanding of the law is that this is required of all ads that make unsupported medical claims.
This one's for a super male pill from Europe.
Oh, it's from Europe.
We'd better read on.
It's an all-natural super sex pill, and it makes some very specific claims for its male enhancement results that are a little too racy for this podcast.
I counted 24 exclamation points in this one advertisement.
Generally, exclamation point count is considered the hallmark of responsible reporting.
But not to worry, this product does promise that it will not cause blue vision.
Here's an ad for a pheromone additive for your cologne.
It says it was published in a respected biomedical journal.
But they are looking out for you.
They advise you to reject cheap alternatives.
Here's a two-page spread with facing ads for competing male enhancement products.
Skeptoid Files: Water Filter Claims 00:06:18
One of them is Doctor Approved, offers five inches of enhancement and sells for $120 for a three-month supply.
But the other is natural, offers only one to three inches of enhancement and sells for $327 for a six-month supply.
Even though the latter product doesn't enhance you as much, it's worth so much more because it's natural and not doctor-approved.
Once again, we have excellent proof that anything all-natural is much better than anything doctor-approved.
In a world that can feel overwhelming, spreading thoughtful, evidence-based content is one of the best ways to make a positive impact.
Ask your local public radio station to air the Skeptoid Files, a 30-minute radio-friendly version of Skeptoid that pairs two related episodes promoting real science, true history, and critical thinking.
And in these challenging times for public media, we're offering these broadcasts for free to radio stations, available on the PRX Exchange or directly from Skeptoid Media.
It's an easy ask.
Just send a quick message to your station's programming director.
By helping to bring the Skeptoid files to the airwaves, you'll help promote the essential skills we all need to tell fact from fiction.
Just go to your local station's website, find the programming director's email address, or just their general email address.
You can even use the telephone.
I know that might sound crazy.
It's an old legacy device that allows real-time voice communication.
I know that's weird, but hey, it's an option.
The world can feel chaotic, but you're not powerless.
When you promote critical thinking, you can help your community tell fact from fiction.
And that's how we shape a better future.
In uncertain times, spreading good ideas can make you feel helpful, not helpless.
Let's stand up for reason, truth, and understanding.
Together, get them to air the Skeptoid files from Skeptoid Media, available on the PRX Exchange, and they'll know what that is.
One of the most bizarre ads in popular science is for a water filter, or something.
Neither their ads nor their website is willing to tell you exactly what their product is.
that claims pure water, filtered water, and distilled water are toxic, and that their special water machine, whatever it is, is the only way to get water that doesn't spread disease.
Among the mess on their home page are claims that going to the dentist can give you AIDS, pure water causes serious prostate problems, water is dead, internet search engines lie to push their own hidden agenda in spite of human suffering.
And my favorite, sellers of pure water products are breaking the law by hiding facts from buyers that they need to make an informed buying decision.
Exclamation point.
Thank you, Popular Science Magazine, for alerting us to these dangers.
Scientific American is perhaps not as guilty of spreading this nonsense as Popular Science, but their closet is by no means totally clean either.
In nearly every issue, they run a full-page ad for an outrageously priced exercise machine.
And it states clearly that four minutes a day on this machine gives you the same benefit as 20 to 45 minutes of running, plus 45 minutes of weight training, plus 20 minutes of stretching, plus it balances your blood sugar, whatever that means, plus it repairs bad backs and shoulders, plus it will make your body look so good that your friends will all buy one too, all in only four minutes a day.
Now I don't want that company to sue me, so I'm not going to make a statement like, those claims are all blatantly fraudulent.
But I find it bizarre that a magazine with standards for the products they advertise could have read over that copy and found it to be acceptable.
And by the way, the same ad is also in Popular Science.
If you make the decision that your mission is to advance science, it makes no sense to undermine that mission by publishing ads for products that are fraudulent or that make unsupported, bogus claims.
So I can only assume that Popular Science does not have the advancement of science as their mission, or if they do, it's in some kind of negotiable status.
So buyer beware and read with caution.
The standards here are basically the same as those for Oprah or Montel.
You're listening to Skeptoid.
I'm Brian Dunning from Skeptoid.com.
Hello everyone, this is Adrian Hill from Skookum Studios in Calgary, Canada, the land of maple syrup and mousse.
And I'm here to ask you to consider becoming a premium member of Skeptoid for as little as $5 per month.
And that's only the cost of a couple of Tim Horton's double doubles.
And that's Canadian for coffee with double cream and sugar.
Why support Skeptoid?
If you are like me and don't like ads, but like extended versions of each episode, Premium is for you.
If you want to support a worthwhile non-profit that combats pseudoscience, promotes critical thinking, and provides free access to teachers to use the podcast in the classroom via the teacher's toolkit, then sign up today.
Remember that skepticism is the best medicine.
Next to giggling, of course.
Until next time, this is Adrienne Hill.
From PRX.
Export Selection