Consumer Reports Retracts Study But Media Don't Apologize for Their Sloppy Reporting

Photo of Ken Shepherd.

On January 4, 2007, Consumer Reports released what the media considered a damning report that found that many infant car seats are unsafe at 38 mph side-impact crashes. In other words, small children were a car crash away from a grave injury or fatality.

The next morning, ABC, NBC, and CBS's morning programs played up the report, featuring the story prominently. CBS's Hannah Storm even used a newborn baby in a car seat as a prop during an interview.

Well, two weeks and a federal government study later, Consumer Reports issued a retraction. Turns out the laboratory they hired basically performed crash tests that simulated a side impact at 70 mph, a speed at which you are very lucky to come out alive regardless of your age or whether or not you're restrained in a car seat.

Of course, industry insiders felt this was coming, and one even said so on the January 5 "American Morning." But you didn't hear any of that two weeks ago on "Today," "Good Morning America," or "The Early Show." [full story here]

... Consumer Reports also failed to report the name of the
testing firm two weeks ago and that the media failed to question the
methodology of the study and the reputation of the testing firm that conducted
it.

In fact, CNN’s “American Morning” on January 5 featured just
such a skeptic of the Consumer Reports study, the CEO of a company whose
products were impugned by the study.

Evenflo chief Robert Matteucci told CNN that morning that
“despite our repeated requests” the consumer watchdog group “has not been
willing to share the protocol or the results” of the study.

“Any single variable that is not managed properly to the
requirements of the federal standards will lead to inaccurate results, and we
strongly believe that’s what’s happened here,” Matteucci insisted.

Even though Matteucci’s suspicions were indeed correct, he
was not featured in person nor in a sound bite in January 19 coverage on the
broadcast networks. What’s more, Matteucci was all but ignored during January 5
coverage on the networks as “Good Morning America” gave him a 17-word sound
bite and “Today” show aired a 14-word sound bite. Neither network fleshed out
Matteucci’s concerns about the study’s methodology.

—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

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

Shades of the media reporting

Shades of the media reporting those phony statistics regarding wife abuse spiking during the Super Bowl. There are still people out there who cite that "study"...

The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.

- Arabian Proverb

I wonder if Consumer Reports

I wonder if Consumer Reports ever did a study showing the mental damage caused by MSM morning shows (or any others for that matter)...

"If you do not read the newspapers, you are uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you are misinformed." - Mark Twain

Well what the heck, the rep

Well what the heck, the report was as close to the truth as newspaper reporting is, so its OK.

I stopped trusting Consumer R

I stopped trusting Consumer Reports years ago.  The methodology of their "studies" is almost always flawed.  A few years back they did a taste test of two pet foods and then reported that as "grocery store brand pet foods are just as nutritious as premium brands".  They quietly issued a retraction of the entire study the next month, when several companies challenged them on their findings.  Consumer Reports is another one of these "trusted names" that is full of BS.

I did too gaubster, more than

I did too gaubster, more than fifteen twenty years ago..they are mostly a leftist org. that gets their money through leftists...they have caused trouble and money and if I remember correctly put some people out of business through their BS.

I had a huge argument with my other half about subscribing to them years ago, he said 'but it says trial offer and free and all that good stuff'...like I told him there is nothing free, it took me a year and half to get it straightened out with the filthy company.

He used to believe they could do no wrong...gald he saw the light, or at least wanted to stay married to me...LOL!

"If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under."  Ronald Reagan