Reefer Madness at the New York Times
The New York Times weighed in on the marijuana debate July 17 with an article that tilted distinctly in the direction of unwarranted hysteria.
Built around a series of anecdotes involving individuals who got into difficulty with marijuana — which is entirely possible — the story fell apart when it got to the science.
For example, it referred to a 2004 Journal of the American Medical Association study that “suggested that the stronger cannabis is contributing to higher addiction rates.” But the Times failed to note that this study did not provide any actual evidence that higher-potency marijuana is leading to higher rates of abuse or dependence. While such a suggestion was offered by the authors, it was pure speculation, as the study was not designed to determine the effects of potency. And it was arrived at by ignoring relevant data.
According to the official diagnostic criteria, a person can be diagnosed as a ”substance abuser” because of ”recurrent substance-related legal problems” — without any other symptoms. During the period of the JAMA study, marijuana arrests skyrocketed, from 300,000 in 1991 to well over 700,000 in 2001. Given the complete lack of scientific evidence that high-potency marijuana is more addictive, the massive increase in arrests represent a more plausible explanation for the increase in purported “marijuana abuse.”
The story also failed to note that there is no scientific consensus that increases in potency represent any risk at all. For example, an examination of the issue published last year in the journal Addiction noted that claims about increased potency date back to at least 1975, but that “more research is needed to determine whether increased potency … translates to harm for users.”
And the Times, which gave little space to scientists not hysterical about marijuana, let all sorts of utter nonsense go unrefuted, including National Institute on Drug Abuse director Nora Volkow’s bizarre claim that “it’s going to take some real fatalities for people to pay attention” to marijuana. Given that the number of proven fatalities caused by marijuana’s direct effects remains zero, basic journalism should have required the Times to get a contrasting view from one of the many scientists with at least some grip on reality.
Tagged with: marijuana and Media and New York Times and science by the author
39 comments
At least we know who is getting nervous about the future
After reading that NYT article, I was concerned about the confirming viewpoints many readers would have in favor of what it is stating. However, After reading many of the comments by readers, I feel better. It appears that more and more people across the nation are becoming more knowledgeable of the truth of marijuana than those that write, make commercials, and news reports in popular media. America is waking up! FINALLY!
Hell, even my parents think it should be legal. I never thought they would agree with me about that subject!
I would expect better from NY. In terms of progressiveness, I would expect NY to be right behind California and would be more tolerant of the plant. Perhaps it IS just them getting nervous, but then again maybe its just an uptight editor.
Scared??? I think so…
i am going to read the article next and put my two cents in. the east coast is an old man with old money and old ideas. the west coast to me seems more free. may be its the proximity to washington dc. i don’t know. but the attitudes and to feel of daily living when i lived in VA compared to Ca was constricting. you could literally feel it. no disrespect to the citizens of east coast great people but the man has a hold on ya.
NYT is garbage anyways. Here is an example of how south NYT went: http://www.pdnpulse.com/2009/07/new-york-times-magazine-withdraws-possibly-altered-photo-essay.html
As most user commentators noted, *real journalism ethics and standards* is down the shit hole and has submitted to corporate interests and bias political agenda.
I stopped reading the paper a long time ago. A once prestige source of news information, now nothing more than a shadow of its former self.
In other news, I just became a Lifetime Member of MPP.
looks like , we got em runnin scared =) lol
Whether their running or not, the NYT article is an example of inaccurate and persistent propaganda being used to convince the masses that legalization or decriminalization is wrong. While there has been much progress, there is still a lot of ground to cover until the “moral majority” are stopped from spewing false facts.
Why are people still so hysterical about marijuana? Too many deaths have already occured due to the war on drugs. That’s what we should ALL be hysterical about!
Bruce…in reference to the California Ad:
Since these TV stations refused to air the ad MPP put together in support of AB390, does this also now mean that these same stations will not be allowed to air ads that eventually come to light in opposition to the bill?
They might be able to stiffle the debate now, but if they can’t air opposition ads at least they can’t continue to allow false propaganda into the discussion.
Just a thought!
OXFORD,MISSISSIPPI THE U.S. GOVERNMENT HAS A 6 ACRE PLOT FOR PLANTING MARIJUANA.
New York Times = Yellow Journalism at it finest!!!
They are not Reporters, just merely Repeaters……Repeating the “so-called” facts as they are told…….
With Cronkite gone, anything goes!
The NYTs is down the shit hole anyhow as far as reporting and number of people who have a subcript to it. Wonder who gave the a nice chunk of money to run that add? Lobbists? drug free america group? powerful people with thier hands in stim money? Who knows,just shows thier desparation. Shows we are winning.
I’m sure money was involved in presenting that article including some political pressure.
Hey, did you hear about Mark Kirk is running for the vacant seat in the Senate?
And such is always the case isn’t it. That’s the new debate: That the increase in potency has not correlation to harmful effects.
But then again, almost all arguments made by those with an interest in keeping this plant illegal are moot
I would expect better from NY. In terms of progressiveness, I would expect NY to be right behind California and would be more tolerant of the plant. Perhaps it IS just them getting nervous, but then again maybe its just an uptight editor from above about New York which has had some of the HARSHEST drug penalties,ah Calf. not even close to being a N.Y.
NYT is owned by News Corp., Fox. Murdoch, formerly Australian, owns the whole conglomerate. His wife is a Liberal though and influential in his life so this does surprise me. Then again, the tired argument, he has two young children.
Who really knows why they ran it. Maybe they wanted to draw attention to the paper and they knew this would do it.
Heavy karma for lying.
adle1984 – comment #6 – “In other news, I just became a Lifetime Member of MPP”.
Congratulations !!
We should take a offence against the anti drug peeps instead of always being deffensive. The time to strike is now!
when will they realize peopaganda lies and scare tactics will only fuel the fire in our favor-especially in the longrun more and more people are realizing that saying from all those anti tobacco commercials (TRUTH IS CONTAGEOUS) WHICH IS PRETTY FUNNY(not to mention the only true thing the ondcp has ever said) CONSIDERING IT IS DEFINITLY WORKING IN OUR FAVOR-more and more people are realizing that prohibitionists are liers preaching garbage
Bruce,
What does The Times get right anymore? If they didn’t tell us the truth about the run-up to the Iraq war, if they continue to serve as a mouth piece for Wall Street, if they still refuse to acknowledge that the CIA tortured anyone … then what do you expect in the cannabis debate?
They outed that CIA agent…I wont even wrap my fish in that rag,,,makes them taste like shit.
On an unrelated note, there’s a new iPhone app that helps you find medical marijuana outlets, doctors, etc.
Check out the article here:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/168740/need_medical_marijuana_yep_iphones_got_an_app_for_that.html
Brand name, “The Times,” poor journalism here obviously. Doesn’t anyone of creditability do research these days before publishing such a poor reference such as this?
Doesn’t the NY Times get their paper for their newspaper from Weyerhauser Forest Products. That would explain their viewpoint, and why they seek to vilify the goddess shiva. It’s the same motive that Randolph Hearst had back in the Good Old Days, BACK in the USA, In the land of the dollar billllll, and they talk about it still, when a man named Al Capone, tried to make that town his own, he fought the forces of the law.
They tried to redeem themselves with todays article front page!
http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/19/if-marijuana-is-legal-will-addiction-rise/
Sorry to be completely off topic here guys, but I just think this is awesome…
http://www.pcworld.com/article/168740/need_medical_marijuana_yep_iphones_got_an_app_for_that.html
Holy crap, I didn’t realize #23 already posted that iphone cannabis app link already. My apologies everyone.
China’s news also reports” Exaclty what it is told and nothing else.” Seems to me The New York Times is our State Run Propaganda rheteoic Bull shit. Don’t like the truth, Then report the truth.
They want proven fatalities! just last week a cop beat a motorist to death in the street. Why? The guy did not alledgedly want to give up his stash. How many more proven fatalities do we have to witness before we the people are beaten to death? I am still waiting for any news report on this issue. Is this the start of a new China or Russia?
Yankee propaganda. I would not expect anything less from that part of the country.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYNaDcYGaeI
Bruce, Thank the Good Lord you are out there working hard for Truths sake.I hate to think it but theres many years of work ahead to undo the lies and propaganda the government and media have and are still perpertrating upon this country.Ignorance abounds,But truth cuts like a sword.Go Samurai.
http://www.break.com/usercontent/2009/7/white-people-gonna-riot-825433.html
what has happened to our country and world we were built on revolution so why cant we do it now. we have become sheep and our shepherds are greedy, corrupt evil men that don’t care what happens to us. they only what money and that is it.they don’t care how many lives they ruin.
it our body let us put what we want in it as long as we aren’t hurting any one
we need to stop bad mouthing marijuana it is better for pain than opiates i have ms and i have been illegally using marijuana for my nerve pain ever since i was diagnosed cures not wars people
Nora Volkow….now there’s a thought. Some real fatalities. In five thousand years of recorded use, you still can’t produce one, but here’s hoping, eh, Nora? I wouldn’t hold my breath anymore though if I were you, honey, the anoxia is affecting your brain.
Hell, if you guys think that Times article was bad, check out the article from Wednesday’s Fresno Bee newspaper. Or watch this video:
http://kirk.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3605:fighting-super-marijuana&catid=39:fp-videos
I got busted and jailed in 1968 for pot. One of the narks who arrested me told me, “Jim, why don’t you just wait? The stuff will be legal in a couple of years.” Well, now it’s 2009, and I just turned 60. And I still love it. Especially now with the “increased potency”! But don’t assume that anyone is on the run, or that we’re that much closer to winning this battle. “Personally, Scarlett, I don’t give a damn.” I am an American veteran, and will fight for the right to do what I damn well please. I am encouraged, though, that there are now so many more of us who really know the facts. What this is going to take, however, is for many more of us to actually DO SOMETHING!!! How many of you who have commented here have signed petitions or emailed the politicos in charge, to try to get some real change instead of Obama’s ‘spare change’ (which is all we’re gonna have soon)?
The reason the anti people keep bringing up the hight rate of users in dependency clinics is due to the fact the judicial system basically forces them to seek treatment or face severe fines and incarceration. I have yet to hear what the percentage of self admittance to forced admittance is?
Leave a Comment