|Strategies for bending sciencea||Any evidence in present study?|
a) Claim research as ‘fatally flawed’ based on limited scientific grounds and voiced by hired experts|
b) Illegitimate obfuscatory attacks
c) Allied attack where third parties without industry connection (think tanks) are engaged on the industry friendly side.
a) Industry commissioned reports characterized the RN-study as having ‘large and important weaknesses’|
b) Cherry picking data, selecting anecdotal evidence supporting the industry’s views
c) RN-study criticized by liberal politician in think-tank website
a) Challenge integrity of researchers, e.g. as publicized attacks
Yes (not B, see Table 1)|
a) RN-study researchers accused of lip-serving the Minister of Health. (The police were also accused of manipulating routine data).
|Commissioning publications summarizing the state of science, which ignores or belittles unwelcome research.||The hospitality industry commissioned two reports; both ignoring or belittling unfavourable evidence.|
|Manipulating public perceptions about credible science, framing the issue||Systematic framing in media: - of research evidence as flawed and therefore to be discounted in the policy-making; − constructing disagreement between “experts”; − emphasizing the complexity of violence and alternative ways to curb violence|