I've also been accused of some pretty far-out things by Hari fans in the intervening time, like I 'violated an embargo' or 'orchestrated a campaign' against him, as well as the usual 'big pharma shill' stuff. All BS Here, from my perspective, is what happened /2
-
-
Näytä tämä ketju
-
In Autumn 2017, I received an email, via my work account (still had Psychiatry lecturer day job then) offering me an advance copy of a new book all about depression, by one Jhoann Harri (name misspelled on purpose because of name searchers and honestly who has the time?) /3
Näytä tämä ketju -
Publicist said I might be interested as I work in the area of mental health (correct) She said Hari's new book was all about depression and, while some of his claims may be controversial, they're definitely interesting and thought provoking (incorrect) /4
Näytä tämä ketju -
My reaction was "Hari... isn't he that columnist who got done for massive plagiarism and sneakily attacking his critics?" I figured I'd be incredibly annoyed by any claims he had about mental health, so didn't want to: A) Be stressed for no reason B) Waste a book /5
Näytä tämä ketju -
Ergo, I ignored the offer, went back to work. Didn't think about it again at all, until January the next year, when the Guardian, who I worked for, published a very big excerpt from it and promoted it enthusiastically This was alarming /6
Näytä tämä ketju -
By this point, for better or worse, I was sort of a go-to guy for anything Mental Health related at the Guardian. Because I'd covered it a lot before, and been asked multiple times to tackle/rebut dubious MH claims published elsewhere /7
Näytä tämä ketju -
Guardian had even focussed on Mental Health charities in their annual drive just a year or two before And then, they published Hari's claims, uncontested. They also published a glowing book review, which praised his efforts This was alarming, in so many ways /8
Näytä tämä ketju -
My issues with Hari's claims are all in my response piece https://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2018/jan/08/is-everything-johann-hari-knows-about-depression-wrong-lost-connections … And also, the follow-up I wrote after many people contacted me to say they'd been on the verge of stopping their meds cold-turkey after reading Hari's claims https://twitter.com/garwboy/status/956187792295460867?lang=en … /9
Näytä tämä ketju -
But what I didn't reveal at the time, because professionalism, was just how much resistance there was behind the scenes wrt getting my counterarguments published It was genuinely disconcerting /10
Näytä tämä ketju -
My own editor, who is lovely and brilliant, tried to talk me out of it. Apparently, she was at Uni with Hari. She knows he 'means well'. I could be put in touch with him, so he can explain. A copy of his book could be sent to me, so I could 'better understand' etc. /11
Näytä tämä ketju -
I called bullshit on that right away. That's never been how I've done things before. About 40% of all my articles were calling out someone else's dangerous public claims, it had never once been insisted on them having the pre-emptive chance to 'explain' or talk me down /12
Näytä tämä ketju -
And I wasn't going to suddenly make an exception for a known plagiarist who engages in immoral practices making genuinely-dangerous claims about mental health that could (and did) put very vulnerable people at risk. Just because he's old mates with the behind-the-scenes gang /13
Näytä tämä ketju -
That's why I got to the point where I felt I had to write something in the first place. I expected the usual types who attack cynical ethically-dubious attention-seekers making dodgy self-aggrandising claims to do the same here. But no. Not a bit of it /14
Näytä tämä ketju -
Instead, from what I could see, a lot of the 'right on' crew were celebrating Hari's 'return' Saw many a 'hooray, he's back!' tweet, as if he'd been off on a sabbatical, not drummed out of the industry for breaking the most important rules and doubling down on it /15
Näytä tämä ketju -
Seemed like Harri was allowed a free pass to say whatever he liked, no matter how dangerous/cynical/inaccurate, nor how much it endangered vulnerable people Because he was 'part of the gang'. That's how it looked, anyway. Your mileage may vary. /16
Näytä tämä ketju -
Thing is, far as I was concerned, I was a random geek with a moderately popular blog. It shouldn't fall to me to be the first one to call out dangerous claims in a major publication. But regardless, that's essentially how it panned out. So I did. /17
Näytä tämä ketju -
I wasn't the only one, or even the first, to publicly take issue with Hari's claims, for the record. Many others did, even more thoroughly. But I seemed to become the figurehead for the backlash. Maybe because I did it in the Guardian, the same platform /18
Näytä tämä ketju -
But my suspicion of Hari's glowing coverage isn't just based on the public responses from people who, let's be honest, really should know a lot better. A lot of behind-the-scenes stuff really reinforced this view One thing in particular /19
Näytä tämä ketju -
After I published my rebuttal to Harri's claims, I was informed that he'd read it, and was not at all happy about it Fine by me, he wasn't meant to be. He knows where I am if he wants to take issue with my arguments and concerns But oh no, he was sneakier than that... /20
Näytä tämä ketju -
The evening I was messaged by a Guardian contact, saying Harii wasn't happy, had written a response to me on his own site, and insisted there be a link to this at the end of my article The editors had put this in my piece for him, and were messaging to say "Hope this is OK" /21
Näytä tämä ketju -
I replied saying this absolutely, categorically, fundamentally was NOT OK, and in fact, because I had the access to do so, had already gone into my article and deleted the 'updates', because that was outrageous and I wasn't having it. /22
Näytä tämä ketju -
Many are criticised in the Guardian. Film/music/book/comedy/TV. If those criticised got in touch and angrily insisted the original piece be retroactively altered to drive traffic to their own site explaining why it's wrong, they'd be told to go piss up a rope. Rightly /23
Näytä tämä ketju -
But apparently, this doesn't apply when a known (and largely unapologetic) plagiarist has a strop when his dangerous claims are criticised by someone with a much smaller reach. Then it's entirely reasonable to do what he wants. Because he's 'one of the gang' /24
Näytä tämä ketju -
Didn't stop there either. My reaction must have been pretty forceful, as nobody at the Guardian tried to change my piece again, but Harri still kept trying it on /25
Näytä tämä ketju -
Had a follow up message the next day, saying Harri had now included a link to my article critiquing his claims in the response on his site, so could I know do the same for him ...what? Seriously, what the actual? /26
Näytä tämä ketju -
The fact that Harri'd included a link to the thing he's replying to in the response he'd written... apparently, I owe him for that? He genuinely expected to be rewarded, that he was being magnanimous, for citing his sources. Rather than it being the absolute bare minimum /27
Näytä tämä ketju -
Obviously, I said no. I am categorically not including a link to a response to my critique, in someone else's site, just because he linked to the thing he's talking about. That's not how anything works /28
Näytä tämä ketju -
And yes, this did end up in the surreal situation of me, the freelance self-taught science blogger, explaining journalistic standards and ethics, to the trained people running a major media platform. Those things are still relevant, even if it is your 'mate', or a colleague /29
Näytä tämä ketju -
Harri himself really didn't react well to this. He publicly referenced the pushback since, but on here at least, never referred to me by name, only ever as 'a Guardian Blogger', which is all kinds of cynical shite /30
Näytä tämä ketju -
For the record, in this dispute about dangerous claims about mental health Harri = Journalist, interviewer, known to use unethical practices/falsehoods Me = PhD neuroscientist, 6+ years lecturing about psychology/psychiatry at the time I was 'envious' according to some /31
Näytä tämä ketju - Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.