One of the few laudable things about the National Cancer Institute has
been its journal. Readers may have noticed how many of our own stories
over the years have been inspired or supported by articles in JNCI, including
those on modified citrus pectin.... For years, all science journalists
who requested it have received complementary copies of this excellent
bimonthly publication, one of the best non-commercial sources of professional
education in the cancer field.
That is why it is particularly disturbing that NCI announced earlier
this year that, in order to save some money, it would no longer distribute
JNCI as a courtesy to science writers. This presents no hardship to larger
news organizations, but the burden will fall disproportionately on smaller,
independent publications.
Then on November 8, NCI announced that it was looking for a private publisher
to take over production of the journal. Over a period of five years, NCI
intends to "slowly transition to a private publisher," with
NCI maintaining the selection of editor-in-chief. The reason for these
changes is, in the words of NCI, that "government ownership prohibits
accepting paid advertising and other methods of building revenue."
The Journal costs $1.7 million to print and distribute, of which subscribers
pay $1 million. But no alternative proposals have been put forward to
make the JNCI more accessible to the main audience for cancer information,
the patients, by, say, featuring sympathetic information on currently
available alternative approaches.Accepting paid advertising is a very
bad idea. But it happens to be one of the ways that pharmaceutical companies
influence the editorial content of the journals they advertise in. All
you have to do is look at mainstream cancer publications. They are filled
with glossy four-color ads for the very drugs being discussed, almost
always favorably, in that journal's articles.
