Safety Lit - Controversy

Controversy

Researchers and policymakers who address controversial safety-related issues have been targets of threats or violence for hundreds of years from those with strong feelings who wish to obstruct certain knowledge for the basis of evidence-based policy. More recently, researchers and their institutions have come under attack for work in the areas of firearms and motorcycle helmets. These sorts of things are known because they have been the subject of editorials in journals and even print and broadcast news stories. However, providers of scholarly information such as SafetyLit have also been harmed by those who disagree with part of its content. Some SafetyLit readers write letters to the agencies and organizations that provide funding for the project. Others take more extreme action to make their point. Distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks have been made against the SafetyLit servers. Other attackers organized their interest groups to subscribe to the SafetyLit email service and then to label the SafetyLit messages as unsolicited spam by using their internet service providers' automated reporting process. This in an unsuccessful attempt to block all users of that ISP from receiving SafetyLit email messages.

Some of the topics that bring the most complaints are not what might be expected:

The single most controversial subject that generates the most letters are citations to articles that complainers believe promote bicycle helmet wearing. Throughout the year, SafetyLit receives an average of 16.4 complaints each week that the Update Bulletin contains a citation to an article about bicycle helmets. (Articles about helmet laws are not counted here. Instead, they are included below under 'nanny government'.)

The second-most controversial topic is any article concerning brain or spinal cord injury prevention. These complaints come from those who take an extreme view on issues of the rights of persons with acquired disabilities. They argue that efforts to prevent central nervous system injuries suggest that persons who have experienced these injuries are less valued than persons who are uninjured.

• Articles about 'nanny government' laws or regulations (14.3 complaints per week). These are complaints about issues such as: building codes; motor vehicle design standards and regulations (e.g. air bags, helmet laws, speed limits, cellular telephone prohibitions); consumer product risks and regulations.
• Articles they believe are biased in favor of firearm control regulations (14.1)
• Articles they believe are biased in opposition to firearm control regulations (11.6)
• Articles about an ethnic group or population they do not like (8.3)
• Articles about suicide prevention (5.2). The writers believe that suicide can be a good and rational choice—even for adolescents.
• Articles that reference psychology, human behavior, and risk-taking (5.0). The writers believe that these are biased in favor of psychology and psychiatry, professions they believe are a threat to basic human rights and a danger to society.
• Articles about intimate partner violence (4.8). Correspondents say the problem is exaggerated, that most reported cases are lies, or that most times the physical aggression was provoked and deserved.
• Articles about alcohol and the risk of traffic crashes (4.7). The writers argue that people who drink and drive rarely have crashes and, when they do, it is not necessarily related to alcohol or that, for the many drivers who are tense and highly strung, alcohol relaxes them and they drive more safely.