The Seattle Times did a powerful series in March of last year documenting potential financial and professional misconduct at Seattle's Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center. According to the Times' "Uninformed Consent" series, 20 patients who were not fully informed of the risks involved with their experimental treatments died after undergoing bone marrow transplant procedures. The Hutch vehemently denies the Times' version of events, but that hasn't stopped the journalism awards from piling up over at the Times--all except one, which won't be decided until April: the Pulitzer.
The Pulitzer Prize, an ambitious dream by the late, self-made newspaper tycoon Joseph Pulitzer, has become the journalism's Holy Grail, and the quest to get the prize is often bloody. In The Wall Street Journal last week, editor Laura Landro, who was treated for cancer at the Hutch, wrote an op-ed attacking the Seattle Times series. The next day, The New York Times weighed in, pointing out the rather obvious tactical timing of the editorial. "Uninformed Consent" appeared in The Seattle Times almost a year ago, but The Wall Street Journal waited until a few weeks before the final Pulitzer vote to criticize it. The New York Times, however, pulled a few punches in their reporting.
It wasn't just the timing of the Wall Street Journal piece that was problematic. Landro wasn't just treated by the Hutch. She started an endowment fund called the Laura Landro Salomon Endowment Fund, wrote a book about cancer, and gives all the proceeds from the sale of her book to the Hutch. At a funeral she attended in Seattle last year, according to a source from the Times, Landro allegedly lobbied attending Seattle Times editors against running the Hutch story.
There's more. After "Uninformed Consent," the Hutch hired local PR firm Gogerty Stark Marriott to help manage the fallout. Last month, David Marriott, one of the firm's partners, contacted different groups that had already given the Times awards, like the Press Club and the Associated Press, complaining about the Hutch series. A few months ago, a medical industry group called the Association of Independent Research Institutes (AIRI) sent a letter and a packet of information to the Pulitzer Prize committee, on the Hutch's behalf, slamming the Times series. "We must put forth evidence that we believe shows the coverage by The Seattle Times... does not accurately portray all the facts of the situation," said the January 23 AIRI letter. The Times responded with a letter of its own disputing AIRI's claims.
The Hutch's campaign against the Times is just nasty, similar to the campaign waged against Ron Howard's film A Beautiful Mind. The omens don't look good for the Hutch, however. On Sunday, March 24, A Beautiful Mind took home the Best Picture Oscar.
Send media tips and info to pat@thestranger.com.
