Home

Washington Post v. RADAR

Submitted by anthony on Mon, 2008-04-28 21:07.

Article here. Excerpt:

'Over the past three weeks, a notable public faceoff occurred in the Washington Post.
...
Without providing any research evidence, Meier goes on to make the improbable claims that most custody disputes "arise in the context of mothers seeking to end abuse or protect their children" and "mothers have few means of protecting their children from dangerous fathers". Meier's statements represent a serious misrepresentation of a well-known government statistics, and are highly defamatory of fathers.'

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I'm not sure how RADAR figures this misconduct rule applies

Submitted by axolotl on Fri, 2008-05-02 04:46.

The GWU policy states:

"Research misconduct includes, without limitation, fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research or in reporting research results. All employees or individuals associated with The George Washington University should report observed, suspected, or apparent misconduct in research to the Associate Vice President for Health Research, Compliance and Technology Transfer."

Meier was neither proposing, performing, reviewing, or reporting research. Obviously I'm not trying to defend her. But what she is guilty of is misrepresenting information, or giving misleading info to the public, or lying, or something like that which is vague and would be hard to nail someone for. Don't you think she thought about these issues before she made the statements?

»