Reuters is a respected news outlet, not a PR firm. But you wouldn’t know it from a recent article blasting the World Health Organization cancer agency IARC that reeks of industry bias.

Last week, Reuter published Kate Kelland’s article “Who says bacon is bad?” Under the guise of investigative journalism, it questions the validity of the World Health Organization’s designation of processed meats as “probably carcinogenic”. Citing “experts from academia, industry and public health” the article puts forth a convincing argument.

The problem? Those “experts” all have a track record of taking money from big business in exchange for biased research, reports, and testimony. Tell Reuters if it’s in the business of journalism and not PR, it needs to stop quoting biased sources with corporate ties.

Tell Reuters to do real journalism and not quote biased sources linked to Big Agra as “experts”.

It’s clear from Kelland’s other reporting with Reuters that her beef with the IARC has less to do with bacon and more to do with Monsanto’s favorite pesticide chemical, glyphosate. The IARC labeled glyphosate probably carcinogenic in 2015, a decision which Kelland claims was a “conflict of interest”.    

The article is full of quotes from “experts” with notorious pro-industry ties. For instance, Kelland quotes Bob Tarone’s criticism of WHO, but fails to disclose that his International Epidemiology Institute once counted “corporate counseling” and “litigation support” among its list of services.

This isn’t the first time Reuters has been called out for GMO lobby bias in its reporting. In 2005, it admitted it failed to disclose the bias of GM lobbyists quoted as objective sources. With Reuters falling back on old habits, we need to provide a refresher course in journalistic integrity and make sure Reuters stops spreading misinformation about glyphosate and other dangerous Big Agra chemicals.

Tell Reuters to stop quoting “experts” tainted by industry money.