Why Patent Protection In The Drug Industry Is Out Of Control; Forbes, 1/19/17

Robert Pearl, M.D., Forbes; 

Why Patent Protection In The Drug Industry Is Out Of Control

"Patents originated in ancient Greece. This legal protection assumed greater importance in 15th-century Venice as a means to protect the nation-state's glass-blowing industry. The first patent granted in the United States was in 1790.

Across history, governments created patents for two important purposes. The first was to stimulate interest in research and find solutions to problems that vexed the nation and the world. The second was to promote the broader good of the country. The duration of time designated for exclusive use of the new technology or approach was intended to be relatively short, with the public gaining the resulting benefits in perpetuity. As such, the granting of a patent was designed to advance not only the interests of its creator, but also, equally, the economy and well-being of the nation.

The intent of the patent process and the balance between the dual objectives have been warped over the past decade. "

Russia’s radical new strategy for information warfare; Washington Post, 1/18/17

David Ignatius, Washington Post; Russia’s radical new strategy for information warfare

"Krutskikh’s comments may have been a precursor of a new doctrine for information operations announced publicly by the Kremlin in December. The senior administration official described the Russian strategy: “They think of information space as a domain of warfare. In the U.S, we tend to have a binary view of conflict — we’re at peace or at war. The Russian doctrine is more of a continuum. You can be at different levels of conflict, along a sliding scale.”...

In Russia’s view, America is pushing just as aggressively in the information space, but denies it. “Things we perceive as free speech, they perceive as aggressive behavior from the West,” noted the senior U.S. official."

Aide to Md. lawmaker fabricated article on fraudulent votes for Clinton; Washington Post, 1/18/17

Ovetta Wiggins, Washington Post; Aide to Md. lawmaker fabricated article on fraudulent votes for Clinton

"Harris told the Times that he created fake news to earn money. After investing $5 for the domain name, he earned about $22,000 in online advertising revenue.

In an interview with the Times, Harris expressed guilt for spreading lies but also a sense of pride in doing it so well.

“At first it kind of shocked me — the response I was getting,” he said. “How easily people would believe. It was almost like a sociological experiment.”"

Justin Trudeau’s Family Vacation on Aga Khan’s Island Leads to Ethics Inquiry; New York Times, 1/16/17

Ian Austen, New York Times; 

Justin Trudeau’s Family Vacation on Aga Khan’s Island Leads to Ethics Inquiry

"Canada’s federal conflict-of-interest and ethics office confirmed on Monday that it is investigating the propriety of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his family’s spending part of the Christmas holidays as guests of the Aga Khan, the billionaire philanthropist and spiritual leader of Ismaili Muslims, on a private island in the Bahamas."

On ethics: Obama went high, Trump goes low; Chicago Tribune, 1/18/17

Steve Chapman, Chicago Tribune; On ethics: Obama went high, Trump goes low

"That fall, McCain tried to use the charge against his opponent, but the air had gone out of it. After the March session, the Tribune, which had criticized Obama's handling of the matter, editorialized that he had reaffirmed its confidence in his "professional judgment and personal decency" and set "a standard for candor by which other presidential candidates facing serious inquiries now can be judged."

Trump, on the other hand, has set a standard lower than that of any president in modern times. His business ties will serve as a constant temptation to him and those who want something from him or the U.S. government. And that's fine with him.

On his way to the White House, Obama understood his obligation not only to behave ethically but to be open with the voters. Trump has insisted on doing whatever he pleases while refusing to provide useful information about his activities.

Obama's view was that he should be careful to avoid scandal. Trump's view is that for him, there is no such thing."

Emoluments: Trump's Coming Ethics Trouble; The Atlantic, 1/18/17

• RICHARD W. PAINTER, LAURENCE H. TRIBE, NORMAN L. EISEN, AND JOSHUA MATZ, THE aTLANTIC; 

Emoluments: Trump's Coming Ethics Trouble

"The underlying concern here is that it is precisely Trump’s beneficial government services that foreign powers may hope to purchase for their money whenever they patronize or advantage his businesses. That is, foreign powers (and their agents) may pay Trump, in his capacity as owner of valuable business assets around the world, so that Trump, in his capacity as president, will play in their interest and push U.S. policies in their direction. It may be impossible to prove this on a case-by-case level, given the complex and often hidden motives guiding presidential conduct, but the whole theory of the foreign emoluments clause is to guard against the very possibility of transactions raising this creeping danger.

Trump’s lawyer, Sheri Dillon, has said that “Trump wants there to be no doubt in the minds of the American public that he is completely isolating himself from his business interests.” But if that were actually true, Trump would have done more—much more—to separate himself from his global business empire. Instead, he adopted the mere shell of a plan, utterly inadequate to the demands of the Constitution.

Trump will thus place himself in clear violation of America’s basic charter from the very first instant of his presidency."

Chaffetz to get meeting he demanded with ethics official who criticized Trump; Politico, 1/18/17

Darren Samuelsohn, Politico; 

Chaffetz to get meeting he demanded with ethics official who criticized Trump

"“Allowing the public to attend our meeting — or, at the very least, to view it through live broadcast or the attendance of the news media — would ensure transparency and educate the public about how OGE guards the executive branch against conflicts of interest,” he added, though noting he would agree to a private meeting if Chaffetz again refused to speak in front of an audience.

But on Thursday, Chaffetz office said he and Shaub would meet privately on Monday, Jan. 23.

The request for a public meeting is the latest turn in an escalating feud pitting Shaub against Chaffetz and the Trump administration.

It’s also part of a broader struggle over Shaub’s new order of operation under the Office of Government Ethics. The agency has typically operated in relative obscurity under past directors, but, dealing with a president elect who heads a vast business empire, the director has made a controversial break with precedent by adopting an increasingly public profile."

Critical, But Overlooked: Ethics Is a Tough Sell to Funders. Is That About to Change?; Inside Philanthropy, 1/17/17

Mike Scutari, Inside Philanthropy; 

Critical, But Overlooked: Ethics Is a Tough Sell to Funders. Is That About to Change?

"Strong ethics may be all important to the healthy functioning of American society, but this is an area that's historically fallen through the cracks of foundation grantmaking programs. Fundraisers for ethics work routinely have to shoehorn their proposals to fit into the issue areas that foundations do care about, like public health or campaign finance reform. Individual donors play a critical role in supporting ethics research, but contributors interested in this area are hardly plentiful. If you search "ethics" in the Lilly School donor base of gifts of a million dollars and up, you'll get a mere five results...

AI is much in the news right now, and ethics giving often follows headlines. A few years back, after the financial crisis, business schools received a string of gifts aimed at teaching ethics to tomorrow's executives and financiers. But as memory of the financial crisis faded, so did this stream of money...

Indeed, if reporting persists out of Trump's Washington regarding conflicts of interest, it seems likely that the ethics field writ large will get a Trump bump when it comes to fundraising."

Free Speech Advocates, Publishers Wrestle With Questions Of Censorship; NPR, 1/12/17

Lynn Neary, NPR; 

Free Speech Advocates, Publishers Wrestle With Questions Of Censorship

"Both the NCAC and PEN America say the best response to hate speech is not more censorship.

"Trying to suppress hateful speech doesn't make it go away," says Bertin. "I mean, I think the whole idea of free speech requires us to be active participants, and when we hear ideas that we think are bad and harmful, it requires us to say 'why,' not just say 'shut up.'"

But publisher Dennis Johnson says another equally important right is at stake here: The right to protest.

"This is not about censoring right wing voices," he says. "This is about combating hate speech and its entry into the mainstream.""

U.S. Supreme Court justices fret over offensive trademarks; Reuters, 1/18/17

Andrew Chung, Reuters; 

U.S. Supreme Court justices fret over offensive trademarks

"The justices during the arguments seemed to agree with the band that the government was favoring some trademarks while disapproving others, a kind of discrimination based on viewpoint traditionally forbidden by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees free speech.

But the justices appeared to struggle over whether banning offensive slurs is reasonable in the trademark system, which is used to promote commerce.

Conservative Justice Anthony Kennedy asked the band's attorney, John Connell, whether a group of non-Asians using the name The Slants to mock Asians could be denied a trademark. Connell said they could not.

Kennedy questioned whether the trademark system should be considered like a public park "where you can say anything you want.

In rejecting The Slants' trademark, government officials relied on a provision of the 1946 Lanham Act that prevents the registration of marks that may disparage certain people."

In Battle Over Band Name, Supreme Court Considers Free Speech And Trademarks; NPR, 1/18/17

Nina Totenberg, NPR; 

In Battle Over Band Name, Supreme Court Considers Free Speech And Trademarks

""Vagueness means that a law doesn't give enough instruction to citizens on how to follow the law," Shapiro says. "What is disparaging? It depends on the particular trademark examiner you get, or the particular judge."

Tushnet replies that in a program with 500,000 applications for trademark registration each year, there will inevitably be some inconsistencies, just as there are in the judgments made under the other parts of the law. In each case, she observes, if you get turned down for a trademark registration, you can appeal within the agency. If you lose there, you can go to court.

But she adds that the trademark registration system has served the nation well.

"It's a complex system, and if you pull out a chunk of it without extreme care, you're going to upset the rest of the system."

And that, she says, could put the whole trademark system in jeopardy."

SCOTUS To Hear From Band The Slants For Right To Trademark Name; Here & Now, WBUR, 1/17/17

Here & Now, WBUR; 

SCOTUS To Hear From Band The Slants For Right To Trademark Name

"The Asian-American band The Slants will appear before the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday to argue for full trademark rights to their name, which is a pejorative.

The Portland band has won its case in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in which the court ruled that the Patent and Trademark Office and the Department of Justice is infringing on the group's rights to freedom of speech.

Here & Now's Robin Young speaks with Rebecca Tushnet (@rtushnet), professor of law at Georgetown Law School, about the conflict for rights to the name."

It's Copyright Week: Join Us in the Fight for a Better Copyright Law; Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), 1/16/17

Kerry Sheehan, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF); 

It's Copyright Week: Join Us in the Fight for a Better Copyright Law

"We're taking part in Copyright Week, a series of actions and discussions supporting key principles that should guide copyright policy. Every day this week, various groups are taking on different elements of the law, and addressing what's at stake, and what we need to do to make sure that copyright promotes creativity and innovation...

Here are this year’s Copyright Week principles:

• Monday: Building and Defending the Public Domain. The public domain is our cultural commons and a crucial resource for innovation and access to knowledge. Copyright policy should strive to promote, and not diminish, a robust, accessible public domain.

• Tuesday: You Bought It, You Own It, You Fix It. Copyright law shouldn't interfere with your freedom to truly own your stuff: to repair it, tinker with it, recycle it, use it on any device, lend it, and then give it away (or re-sell it) when you're done.

• Wednesday: Transparency and Representation. Copyright policy must be set through a participatory, democratic, and transparent process. It should not be decided through back room deals, secret international agreements, or unilateral attempts to apply national laws extraterritorially.

• Thursday: 21st Century Creators. Copyright law should account for the interests of all creators, not just those backed by traditional copyright industries. YouTube creators, remixers, fan artists and independent musicians (among others) are all part of the community of creators that encourage cultural progress and innovation.

• Friday: Copyright and Free Speech. Freedom of expression is fundamental to our democratic system. Copyright law should promote, not restrict or suppress free speech.

Every day this week, we’ll be sharing links to blog posts and actions on these topics at https://www.eff.org/copyrightweek and at #CopyrightWeek.

If you’ve followed Copyright Week in past years, you may note that this year, we didn’t designate a specific day to focus on fair use. Fair use—the legal doctrine that permits many important uses of copyrighted works without permission or payment—is critical to the law’s ability to promote creativity, innovation, and freedom of expression. Fair use is a part of each of this year’s principles."

Just when you thought the Trump ethics disaster couldn’t get worse, it did; Washington Post, 1/16/17

Richard Painter and Norman Eisen, Washington Post; Just when you thought the Trump ethics disaster couldn’t get worse, it did

"Richard Painter, a professor of law at the University of Minnesota, was the chief White House ethics lawyer from 2005 to 2007 and is vice chair of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. Norman Eisen, a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution, was the chief White House ethics lawyer from 2009 to 2011 and is the chair of CREW...

Priebus also attacked Shaub’s competence, and so his livelihood, questioning “what this person at Government Ethics, what sort of standing he has any more in giving these opinions.” In fact, the director is a dedicated and talented ethicist who has served Democratic and Republican presidents alike with distinction and without controversy for many years. He has already approved 54 percent of the Trump nominees who have submitted their paperwork to OGE, compared with just 29 percent at this point in the Obama transition eight years ago. If the White House chief of staff had made these kinds of threats against the head of OGE when we were serving in the White House, we would have resigned immediately.

We think apologies are due Shaub. In addition, we recommend that Republicans back off of their threats. How about Chaffetz instead publicly affirm the need for the agency and invite Shaub to have a public conversation about that and about Trump’s conflicts with both the majority and minority members of the committee? We are sure that Shaub would accept such an offer and explain to the committee and the public why his concerns about the president-elect’s plan are well founded."

The Daily 202: Monica Crowley losing White House job shows that the rules of politics still apply for Donald Trump; Washington Post, 1/17/17

James Hohmann, Washington Post; 

The Daily 202: Monica Crowley losing White House job shows that the rules of politics still apply for Donald Trump

"A steady stream of stories since the weekend before last has revealed pretty egregious examples of apparent plagiarism over a period of several years, from a 2012 book to her PhD dissertation and op-eds.

I have little doubt that Barack Obama and George W. Bush would have immediately terminated someone who did what Crowley appears to have done if that person was up for a similar posting (with a role in speechwriting and drafting statements in the name of the president).

There are many precedents: Plagiarism doomed Joe Biden’s 1988 presidential campaign, and just three years ago Montana Sen. John Walsh (D) ended his campaign for a full term after it came out that he’d plagiarized a paper for the Army War College...

Trump continued to stand by her even as publisher HarperCollins announced that it would no longer sell Crowley’s book and more stories detailed fresh examples.


Finally, because a handful of reporters doggedly pursued the story, the pressure became too much. Yesterday afternoon, Crowley sent a statement to the Washington Times to say that “after much reflection” she’s decided to stay in New York. She made no mention of plagiarism."

After Trump tweet, ethics office to U.S. employees: do not endorse products; Reuters, 1/13/17

Emily Stephenson, Reuters; 

After Trump tweet, ethics office to U.S. employees: do not endorse products

"A day after President-elect Donald Trump encouraged supporters to "Buy L.L. Bean," a U.S. ethics watchdog on Friday warned federal employees they must not endorse products or companies.

The U.S. Office of Government Ethics (OGE) said on its official Twitter account: "All executive branch employees must refrain from misuse of position, including endorsements."

No mention of Trump was made in the tweet, and many rules for federal employees do not apply to the president. The ethics office has tweeted other reminders to employees this week, including one that federal gift restrictions remain in place during the upcoming inauguration.

Republicans say they’ll protect you if you have a pre-existing condition. Don’t believe it.; Washington Post, 1/13/17

Paul Waldman, Washington Post; Republicans say they’ll protect you if you have a pre-existing condition. Don’t believe it.

"Here’s a list of some things that will return once they repeal the ACA:

• The application process for insurance will become much more cumbersome and onerous.
• Insurers will be able to charge people with pre-existing conditions higher premiums.
• Insurers will be able to impose yearly and lifetime limits on benefits, which affects people who have serious illnesses or accidents. This could apply to those with good employer-provided coverage as well as those who buy on the individual market.
• “Job lock,” in which people are afraid to leave their job and do something like start a new business for fear of losing the insurance they have, will return.
• Insurers will be able to charge women higher premiums than men, because they consider being a woman to be a pre-existing condition.
• Insurers will be able to rescind coverage when you get sick.

All of that was eliminated by the ACA. It’s possible that in their replacement plan Republicans might take steps to retain some of what the ACA did in these areas, but right now we just don’t know.

So let’s look at what we do know."

Cancer survivor who once opposed federal health law challenges Ryan on its repeal; Washington Post, 1/14/17

Amy Goldstein, Washington Post; Cancer survivor who once opposed federal health law challenges Ryan on its repeal

"“Just like you, I was a Republican,” Jeff Jeans began. Standing on the stage, the Wisconsin congressman broke into a grin as Jeans said he had volunteered in two GOP presidential campaigns and opposed the Affordable Care Act so much that he'd told his wife he would close their business before complying with the health-care law.

But that, he said, was before he was diagnosed with a “very curable cancer” and told that, if left untreated, he had perhaps six weeks to live. Only because of an early Affordable Care Act program that offered coverage to people with preexisting medical problems, Jeans said, “I am standing here today alive.”

The speaker's smile vanished. His brow furrowed.

“Being both a small-business person and someone with preexisting conditions, I rely on the Affordable Care Act to be able to purchase my own insurance,” Jeans said. “Why would you repeal the Affordable Care Act without a replacement?”

Ryan went for the human touch. “First, I am glad you are standing here,” he replied. “I mean really. Seriously. Hey. No really.”

But Jeans interrupted him: “I want to thank President Obama from the bottom of my heart, because I would be dead if it weren't for him.”"

California lawmakers propose bills to teach students to identify 'fake news'; Guardian, 1/12/17

Alan Yuhas, Guardian; 

California lawmakers propose bills to teach students to identify 'fake news'

" In northern California, state senator Bill Dodd proposed a measure that would ask the state education board to create a “media literacy” curriculum. His proposal would incorporate training in social science courses from first through 12th grade and try to teach students critical thinking, independent research and “digital citizenship”.

“The rise of fake and misleading news is deeply concerning,” Dodd said in a statement. “Even more concerning is the lack of education provided to ensure people can distinguish what is fact and what’s not.”

“By giving students the proper tools to analyze the media they consume, we can empower them to make informed decisions,” he added.

Jason Chaffetz Doesn’t Care About Ethics; Slate, 1/13/17

Dahlia Lithwick, Slate; Jason Chaffetz Doesn’t Care About Ethics

"In a letter to [Jason] Chaffetz, [Elijah] Cummings called for a public hearing with Shaub as the main witness, as opposed to the closed-door meeting Chaffetz is seeking.

But of course, there is no shaming Chaffetz, the guy who announced that he could never again look his daughter in the eye if he endorsed Trump in October, subsequently promised to vote for Trump, and now feels the need to carry Trump’s top secret manila folders around...

Whether it meant attempting to dismantle the congressional watchdog or gunning for the independent ethics chief, it’s now clear that working in a nonpartisan fashion to try to uphold ethical norms is now prohibited in Republican-controlled Washington. You can be sure that so long as it’s ethically bankrupt individuals like Chaffetz in charge of enforcing these norms and laws, then our system will be as rife with corruption as our incoming president wants it to be."

Head of Ethics Office Speaks Out. Some Republicans Ask, Was It Ethical?; New York Times, 1/13/17

Jennifer Steinhauer and Steve Eder, New York Times; Head of Ethics Office Speaks Out. Some Republicans Ask, Was It Ethical?

"Mr. Shaub, a longtime government lawyer who has led the Office of Government Ethics since 2013, has been accused by Representative Jason Chaffetz of Utah, the Republican chairman of the House Oversight Committee, of playing politics and letting “public relations” seep into the office’s ethical guidance. Mr. Chaffetz requested that Mr. Shaub be interviewed by committee staff members by the end of the month.

“I’m concerned that the person in charge of our office of ethics is not the most ethical person,” Mr. Chaffetz said in an interview on Friday, a day after he sent a stinging letter to Mr. Shaub raising the possibility of a congressional investigation. Mr. Chaffetz noted that Mr. Shaub had made critical public comments, including in a recent speech at a left-leaning think tank, about Mr. Trump’s efforts to separate himself from his business interests."

'Could You Patent The Sun?'; New York Times, January 2017

Video, New York Times; 'Could You Patent The Sun?'

"Decades after Dr. Jonas Salk opposed patenting the polio vaccine, the pharmaceutical industry has changed. What does that mean for the development of innovative drugs and for people whose lives depend on them?"

Trolls decided I was taking pictures of Rex Tillerson’s notes. I wasn’t even there.; Washington Post, 1/12/17

Doris Truong, Washington Post; Trolls decided I was taking pictures of Rex Tillerson’s notes. I wasn’t even there.

"Why are people so quick to look for someone to condemn? And during the confusion about the woman’s identity, why is it presumed that she is a journalist? Or that taking pictures of notes in an open hearing is illegal? Or, for that matter, that she was even taking pictures of Tillerson’s notes?

The bright spot is that a few people have acknowledged that they erred. One person left this note on my Facebook timeline: “I was shocked to find that you are in fact not the fox in the henhouse. For that I do apologize. As penance I have gone to several sites that have posted the untrue information about you and corrected them. I doubt it will do a bit of good. I am terribly sorry and wanted you to know that not all Trump supporters are mindless and that the real truth does matter. Hope this mess gets cleared up real soon. God bless.”

The whole episode is not going to drive me off social media, which provides a way for me to connect with people across the miles, including strangers, and to be exposed to a diversity of opinions — including ones I disagree with. But I hope the ridiculousness of what happened to me in less than 12 hours makes others think critically before sharing something that can be easily disproved." 

More New Ways to Explore Patent Data; Blog by Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO Michelle K. Lee, Director's Forum Blog, 1/12/17

Michelle K. Lee, Blog by Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO Michelle K. Lee, Director's Forum Blog; More New Ways to Explore Patent Data

"Making patent data accessible to the public has been a cornerstone of this agency’s policy since its inception. I’m pleased to announce yet another step we’ve taken at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to make such data even easier for the public to understand and use, namely the addition of new features to our patent data visualization and analysis tool, PatentsView. First launched in 2014, PatentsView provides the public a variety of ways to interactively engage, through a web-based platform, the highest-quality patent data available. The underlying database connects 40 years’ worth of information about inventors, their organizations, and their locations in unprecedented ways. PatentsView is a key component of our open data efforts to improve the accessibility, usability, and transparency of U.S. patent data...

You could argue that the innovations documented in our records may very well, collectively, constitute the world’s largest repository of scientific and technological knowledge. But the larger a data set, the more challenging it is to find useful information or trends or, put another way, to separate the signal from the noise. This collaborative tool, developed by the USPTO’s Office of the Chief Economist in conjunction with the American Institutes for Research, New York University, the University of California at Berkeley, Twin Arch Technologies, and Periscopic, aims to make that sorting and separation possible. The shared public and private effort in creating and improving the platform is symbolized in the “.org” domain of http://www.PatentsView.org.

By providing new tools and data to the public, PatentsView demonstrates this agency’s continuing commitment to open data, open government, and evidence-based policymaking."

Troubling examples of ‘pseudoscience’ at the Cleveland Clinic; Washington Post, 1/11/17

Daniel Summers, Washington Post; Troubling examples of ‘pseudoscience’ at the Cleveland Clinic

"People will understandably look for their own answers. Unfortunately, when no less than the president-elect is among those promulgating dangerous misinformation about vaccines, medical providers have to deal with a lot of false, misleading stuff their patients may find.

One way I deal with this is to give patients a list of resources that generally provide good, evidence-based advice. Though I can’t vet every single article they may publish, knowing a few sites that typically give clear, sound information is a valuable resource when patients ask.

Sadly, no matter how glowing its reputation or how superlative the care it routinely provides, I can’t include the Cleveland Clinic on that list. Knowing it promotes treatments that have no grounding in science, or that a patient could stumble upon a fearmongering article that makes baseless claims about the unspecified dangers of environmental toxins on its website, I can’t direct patients there in good faith. Considering its prominence as a renowned medical establishment, that’s a terrible shame.

A Cleveland Clinic doctor spread anti-vaccine views. He's not alone among MDs.; Vox, 1/8/17

Julia Belluz, Vox; A Cleveland Clinic doctor spread anti-vaccine views. He's not alone among MDs.

"Let’s not forget Dr. Mehmet Oz, a board-certified surgeon and faculty member at Columbia University, who is now almost as famous for his magical thinking about medicine as he is for his Emmy Award-winning TV show. (He’s given a platform to other doctors with anti-vaccine sentiments, such as Joe Mercola.)

The medical profession has been struggling with how to deal with dangerous doctor talk, since doctors can pretty much say anything and keep their medical licenses (outside of the doctor-patient context). But with a president-elect coming into the White House who has also shared anti-vaccine rhetoric, the medical profession better think about how to deal with its rogue members, and get better at spreading the message about why we desperately need vaccines."

Cleveland Clinic doc pens viral screed against vaccines, peers call it ‘post-truth medicine’; Washington Post, 1/10/17

Ben Guarino, Washington Post; Cleveland Clinic doc pens viral screed against vaccines, peers call it ‘post-truth medicine’

"An immense organization, the hospital operates a multi-specialty campus in Ohio and several medical centers around the globe. The hospital is well-known for robotic innovation, too, as well as its cardiac care. In 2015, the clinic had more than 6.6 million patient visits and revenue of $7.2 billion.

After becoming the director of the Wellness Institute, Neides secured a long-running monthly column at Cleveland.com. He published more than two dozen articles for the website since January 2014. And no one at the website edited or approved a particular article, according to Chris Quinn, a Cleveland.com vice president.

“Possibly, before the thing caught widescale attention, we would have unpublished it and sought revisions,” Quinn wrote on Monday. “That’s hindsight, though, so I can’t say for sure.” (The only editorial note on the blog post itself indicates that the article was briefly removed before being restored.)

Neides, in addition to damning formaldehyde, raised the specter of the widely debunked claim that there is a link between vaccine and autism."

The Higher Ed Learning Revolution: Tracking Each Student's Every Move; NPR, 1/11/17

Eric Westervelt, NPR; 

The Higher Ed Learning Revolution: Tracking Each Student's Every Move

"Another physicist-turned-education-innovator (is there something in the physics lab water?) named Timothy McKay sees great promise in "learning analytics" — using big data and research to improve teaching and learning.

McKay, a professor of physics, astronomy and education at the University of Michigan argues in a recent white paper, that higher ed needs to "break down the perceived divide between research and practice."

There are privacy and ethical concerns, of course, which in turn has prompted fledgling codes of conduct to spring up.

I reached out to Professor McKay, who also heads Michigan's Digital Innovation Greenhouse, to dig deeper on how learning analytics work in higher ed."

KFC China is using facial recognition tech to serve customers - but are they buying it?; Guardian, 1/11/17

Amy Hawkins Guardian; 

KFC China is using facial recognition tech to serve customers - but are they buying it?

"Of course, the prospect of a company storing data about customers’ faces and fried-chicken preferences raises the ever present trade-off between convenience and privacy. One woman tells me she wouldn’t use the machine for that reason, but most customers are nonplussed. “In China, you don’t have any privacy anyway,” said Li.

He’s right, sort of. Beyond the world of fast-food, personal data in China is becoming an increasingly valuable commodity. A Chinese newspaperrecently conducted an experiment, which found that a citizen’s private data, including apartments they’d rented and internet cafés they’d visited, could be bought using their personal ID number at the cost of just 700RMB (£82). Meanwhile, the government is rolling out a “social credit” system of digitally stored information about a person’s credit history, consumption habits and incidences of “conduct that seriously undermines … the normal social order”. The system also awards points for good behaviour; a person’s point score affects their ability to travel abroad, buy property and enrol their children in certain schools, among other privileges."

Russia waging information war against Sweden, study finds; Guardian, 1/11/17

Jon Henley, Guardian; 

Russia waging information war against Sweden, study finds

"Sweden’s most authoritative foreign policy institute has accused Russia of using fake news, false documents and disinformation as part of a coordinated campaign to influence public opinion and decision-making in the Scandinavian country.

The Swedish Institute of International Affairs said in a comprehensive study that Sweden had been the target of “a wide array of active measures” aimed at “hampering its ability to generate public support in pursuing its policies”...

“We believe it demonstrates an intent to influence decision-making,” Martin Kragh, one of the report’s authors, told Dagens Nyheter newspaper...

It also identified “troll armies” targeting journalists and academics, hijacked Twitter accounts and pro-Kremlin NGOs operating in Sweden as further weapons in what it said amounted to a Russian information war."