The New York City Bar Association and the New York County Lawyers Association have issued cautions to their members against dissemination of misinformation or disinformation: Attorneys should not “make claims of wrongdoing against officers of the court for which they have no factual basis, or which they know to be incorrect.” Nor should attorneys, especially in “a highly charged environment of public interest,” make comments about “the judicial processes or judicial officers” that “they know to be demonstrably misleading or palpably false.”
This article explores "the nuances in legal ethics rules regarding statements made during representation of a client and those made by lawyers not involved in the controversy," concluding that "the New York bar associations were right to rebuke flagrant falsehoods that target the very rule of law."
September 12, 2022
Bar associations address mis/disinformation
May 25, 2022
FSMB updates medical misinformation policy
The Federation of State Medical Boards has updated its "Professional Expectations Regarding Medical Misinformation and Disinformation." In July 2021, FSMB released a statement reminding physicians of the high degree of public trust placed on them and of their ethical and professional responsibility to share factual and scientifically-grounded information - and that spreading COVID vaccine misinformation could result in disciplinary action. The updated policy includes five recommendations for state medical boards:
- "State medical boards are encouraged to adopt a policy that clarifies board expectations
regarding the dissemination of misinformation and disinformation by licensees. - State medical boards must retain their legislated authority to regulate the professional
conduct of licensees in order to effectively protect the public. - When adjudicating cases regarding misinformation and disinformation, state medical
boards are encouraged to consider the full array of authorized grounds for disciplinary
action in their Medical Practice Acts. - When appropriate, state medical boards should consider whether there are options that do
not involve disciplinary action that could help a licensee understand the ethical basis of
their duty to convey accurate information to patients and the public and change or
remediate their behavior appropriately. - State medical boards should not be dissuaded from carrying out their duty to protect the
public by concerns about potential challenges to disciplinary decisions when these
decisions are based on sound regulatory considerations for public protection."
October 07, 2021
Maine: license denial case appealed to Supreme Court
An individual whose application for licensure as a private investigator in Maine was denied on grounds of not having good moral character has appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of the United States. The Maine Department of Public Safety denied the license due to factual inaccuracies in a social media post by the applicant criticizing a police shooting. The posts identified the individual as a private investigator in Massachusetts; the Maine agency claimed that the inaccurate statements violate standards of conduct for a private investigator, such as accurate communication of facts.
September 22, 2021
Mississippi Board of Medical Licensure issues policy on COVID-19 misinformation
The Mississippi State Board of Medical Licensure has adopted a policy to suspend or revoke the license of physicians who spread misinformation about the COVID-19 vaccine. The policy notes doctors' "ethical and professional responsibility" to share factual and scientifically grounded information with patients and states that "spreading inaccurate COVID-19 vaccine information contradicts that responsibility." The policy specifically includes reference to posting on social media.
CLEAR is hosting a webinar on October 19 on Disciplining Practitioners for Off-Duty and/or COVID Misinformation Conduct. Register now
September 08, 2021
Calls to discipline doctors for spreading Covid misinformation
As videos and social media posts of licensed doctors spreading false information about the coronavirus continue to gain popularity, medical groups are calling for discipline against such practitioners. The Federation of State Medical Boards has issued a statement recommending that state boards consider taking disciplinary action against doctors who share false medical claims. The American Medical Association has indicated that spreading misinformation is a violation of the code of ethics.
CLEAR is planning to offer a webinar on disciplining practitioners for off-duty and/or COVID misinformation conduct. Look for details soon.
August 12, 2021
FSMB statement on COVID-19 vaccine misinformation and discipline
The Federation of State Medical Boards has issued a statement that "physicians who generate and spread COVID-19 vaccine misinformation or disinformation are risking disciplinary action by state medical boards, including the suspension or revocation of their medical license." They state that licensed physicians "have an ethical and professional responsibility to practice medicine in the best interests of their patients and must share information that is factual, scientifically grounded and consensus-driven for the betterment of public health. Spreading inaccurate COVID-19 vaccine information contradicts that responsibility, threatens to further erode public trust in the medical profession and puts all patients at risk.”
March 10, 2021
Ontario regulator issues cautions over pandemic-related tweets
The Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons has issued cautions to a pediatrician related to a series of posts on social media that challenged accepted public health advice and regulations related to the COVID-19 pandemic, claiming "no medical or scientific reason for . . . lockdowns" and that "we don't need a vaccine." The complaints committee found the statements misinformed and misleading and "an irresponsible statement to make on social media during a pandemic. . . and a potential risk to public health." Although the tweets were on a personal account, the biography clearly stated that the individual was a physician with affiliations with a doctors group.
October 14, 2020
Court case: use of social media by professionals
a recent Court of Appeal case in Saskatchewan struck down a discipline committee's finding of professional misconduct against a registered nurse who had posted critical comments about the care her grandfather received at a long-term care facility. The Court considered the issue of "whether there is a nexus between the off-duty conduct and the profession that demonstrates a sufficiently negative impact on the profession or the public interest." The Court also considered whether the professional's freedom of expression was unjustifiably infringed upon.
January 16, 2020
New research on consumer perception of occupational licenses
New research released by the National Bureau of Economic Research studied online home improvement service requests from consumers and the impact of licensing status on their hiring of a professional. The research shows that a higher number of reviews, higher ratings, and lower bidding prices influenced consumer choice and that licensing status had essentially no effect on hiring decisions. The paper indicated that the availability of alternative quality checks such as online reviews “has probably reduced the level of regulatory stringency needed to ensure the same service quality as in a world without online reviews.”
October 23, 2018
Social media guidance for healthcare professionals
A London-based law firm has issued some guidance for healthcare practitioners on the use of social media. The report recognizes social media as a valuable tool in the healthcare sector but also notes that, over the past five years, more than 1200 NHS staff have been disciplined for inappropriate use of social media. The guidance offers the simple advice for healthcare practitioners to "think before pressing send" and to not share information about a patient or thoughts about a colleague on social media platforms. The guidance also cautions practitioners to consider that posts on social media are often interpreted differently out of context and are not always shielded by privacy protections.
