« | Main | »



I did perhaps undermine my point by making a few factual errors -- an interesting reflection, as you note, of the limitations of blogging -- but the errors made hardly NEGATE my point, which was that Dawdy and the Times each contributed in unique, complementary, and invaluable ways to the coverage of Zyprexa and Infinite Mind stories.

I did NOT, however, at any time call or suggest Dawdy should be considered a "one-man army" (as you imply by putting that phrase in quotes), nor did I accuse the Times of 'stealing' Dawdy's reporting. You seriously mischaracterize my thesis. It is not, as you suggest, that Dawdy is trod under by a big-footed institution that he "outreports". It is that both Dawdy and the Times contribute invaluable things, each unique to its perspective and position.

Bill Lichtenstein


Thank you for your comments regarding "Who Broke the Fred Goodwin/The Infinite Mind Story."

In response:

1) As you point out in your comments, you may not have called Philip Dawdy a "one man army" (I added the quotes as it is a colloquial phrase), but you did call Dawdy a "one man op[eration]." There doesn't seem to be a substantive difference, is there?

2) More importantly, you claimed that Dawdy "broke" (your words) The Infinite Mind story, which "inspired" (your word again) the Slate.com article, and led to the New York Times article seven months later, which, you point out, never "cited" Dawdy.

In fact, Dawdy's initial April 14, 2008 story on The Infinite Mind criticized the radio show for stating there were no major research studies linking anti-depressants to suicide, something that he failed to provide evidence to dispute. This had nothing to do with Lenzer's story about the pharma ties of three guests, or the eventual Times story about host Fred Goodwin's pharma speaking fees. Yet, your implication is that the Times did an injustice by not crediting Dawdy for his postings.

By the way, Dawdy seems to have taken to heart your story that he is the journalistic muse of reporting on mental health and pharmaceuticals; he just posted what can only be called an on-line temper tantrum over the fact that he spoke with a reporter from Rolling Stone for a story on anti-psychotics, but wasn't credited in the eventual article. (See "Why I Won't Help Reporters, Authors Any Longer" at http://tinyurl.com/cryg2u )

The comments to this entry are closed.


Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner