You've read a little bit here about international law-enforcement agency concern about botnets and how they can turn your home PC into a zombie criminal accomplice if you don't take basic security precautions. Perhaps it's not surprising they're hitting big corporations too. After reading, scroll down to the hilarious post about a bank sending out penis enlargement spam.

Posted by Beau Brendler at 04:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Keith Keeney, vice president of communications for the Calorie Control Council, writes this response to our July 20 post on the Health on the Net Foundation seal. It's broken into two parts, so click on the "continue reading more" link below to go to the whole page. At the bottom are my responses.

Dear Mr. Brendler,

The Calorie Control Council (the "Council") is concerned about some inaccuracies in your article entitled, "Why the HON is Worthless," which appeared on your blog on July 27, 2007. We would like to provide you with the following information regarding the Council's use of the Health On the Net Foundation (HON) seal.
The Council applied for this seal and was our site was reviewed and approved on January 26, 2001. The site was reviewed again by HON on July 29, 2005 and approved yet again. The accreditation is here: http://www.hon.ch/HONcode/Conduct.html?HONConduct376983.

As you know, in order to be approved for the HON seal, Web sites must go through a rigorous review process by the HON committee to ensure the Web site follows the HON's eight principles. The following explains how the Council's Web site (www.caloriecontrol.org) meets all eight of the HON's principles as described here http://www.hon.ch/HONcode/Conduct.html:

1. Authoritative - At the bottom of the site there is a disclaimer that notes, "This site is designed primarily as an educational resource. It is not intended to provide medical advice on personal health matters or to guide treatment -- which is only appropriately done by a qualified health professional."
2. Complementary - As noted above, the Council clearly states that the information contained on this Web site should not replace the doctor-patient relationship and is only intended as an educational resource.
3. Privacy - Caloriecontrol.org respects the privacy and confidentiality of its visitors, and does not require visitors to submit any personal information.
4. Attribution - The information contained on the Web site is referenced with scientific studies and research. For example, this brochure on acesulfame potassium (http://www.caloriecontrol.org/acesulf.html) provides a link for references in order to support the information provided. In addition, the vast majority of the information the Council presents is based on public information from government and reputable health organizations such as the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA), Mayo Clinic, American Diabetes Association, etc. Examples: "Artificial Sweeteners: No Calories¹ Sweet!" on the FDA site: http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2006/406_sweeteners.html, and "Artificial Sweeteners: A safe alternative to sugar" on the Mayo Clinic site: http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/diabetes-diet/NU00592. Also, as required by the HON principles, the date when a clinical page was last modified is clearly displayed.
5. Justifiability - Claims regarding the benefits and safety of low-calorie foods and beverages made on the Web site are carefully supported by scientific research and from information from the FDA, Mayo Clinic, American Dietetic Association, American Medical Association, etc.
6. Transparency - As you noted, the Council discloses it "is an international non-profit association representing the low-calorie and reduced-fat food and beverage industry." The link to our About page (although we realize you seem to prefer a separate button for that) is on every page of our site, not just the homepage.
7. Financial disclosure - The Council discloses its funding sources on its Companies and Products page as required by the HON principles.
8. Advertising Policy - There is no advertising on the Council's Web site.
Your article took issue with the fact that caloriecontrol.org presents an industry's point of view. However, the Council is simply communicating information provided by government, respected scientists and major health organizations. Numerous studies indicate low-calorie foods and beverages are safe and provide consumers many benefits and the Council provides information on this subject to reassure the millions of consumers who enjoy and benefit from the availability of these products.
In addition, you included a link to a negative WebMD article on aspartame. However, we feel you should have also directed your readers to articles written by WebMD that are positive with regard to aspartame's safety, such as http://www.webmd.com/diet/features/which-artificial-sweetner-is-right-for-you?page=2 and http://www.webmd.com/cancer/news/20060404/aspartame-cancer-link-refuted.
It appears the Council's Web site would also qualify for the Consumer Reports WebWatch Guidelines, and we thank you for bringing that to our attention. We will apply for this honorable accreditation and modify any parts of our Web site that do not adhere to these guidelines.
We believe the Council's Web site explicitly follows the guidelines of the HON seal and provides consumers with relevant, scientifically documented information on the ingredients used in the wide variety of low-calorie foods and beverages. And in answer to your question, "Can their Web site be trusted to be a good source of unbiased information for dieters?" we would like to point out that HON is not in the business of evaluating whether information provided is "unbiased" - that is not their purpose nor should it be. Instead, the requirement is to abide by the "attribution" standard, meaning information contained on this site is supported by clear references to source data, which we have done with relevant references and links.
Also, please note that the Council has not hired a "PR agency". Instead, the Council, a small, nonprofit trade organization without a large budget, formed in 1966, is professionally staffed by the Kellen Company, an association management company (AMC). Wikipedia has a good explanation of AMC's here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_management_company. Kellen Interactive is the Internet division of the Kellen Company.
We respectfully submit this information in hopes of some corrections or clarification. We have no doubt that some organizations and web sites have mistakenly and unethically used the HON seal, but caloriecontrol.org clearly is not one of those, and we would like to see the record set straight. Thank you for your consideration of our request.
Sincerely,
Keith Keeney
Vice President, Communications
Calorie Control Council

Here's my response:
First, thanks for writing! We appreciate it.
Second, we stand by the earlier post. Here's why.
1. We didn't say, or mean to imply, that the Calorie Control Council's site somehow came by its seal inappropriately. The post criticizes the HON seal, hence its headline. The blog post also notes HON's intentions are probably good and that there's probably good information on the CCC site. WebWatch has published some research on HON and health seals here.
2. Mr. Keeney is correct: "We would like to point out that HON is not in the business of evaluating whether information provided is 'unbiased.' " That's the central point of the post, and central to our criticism of the HON seal.
3. We didn't link to a negative article about aspartame. We linked to an article on WebMD about the emotional debate surrounding aspartame which, in fact, quotes the Calorie Control Council. We thank you for the additional links.
4. We didn't say the Calorie Control Council hired a PR agency. We said the site is produced by a PR firm. Kellen Interactive on its home page markets its services as "website creation, website promotion and Internet marketing." Promotion and marketing are synonymous functions with public relations. For more about Kellen, its various divisions and its clients, read this entry on SourceWatch and this one.
Further, the Wikipedia entry cited in Mr. Keeney's letter on "association management companies" lists as its primary source an "AMC Institute News Release." Clicking on that link leads you here, to the Web site of the AMC Institute, "the source for professional association management companies." On the home page of the AMC site, the two main media contacts listed, Stan Samples and Kate Grusich, are employees of Kellen Communications.
5. There is no "about us" link on the home page. The link is as I described it. The "Companies and Products Page" is also as I described it, a list of companies, under the heading, "A Select List of Companies and Products Serving Health-Conscious Consumers." It doesn't say, "these are the companies that fund the Calorie Control Council." In addition, the site's URL describes a valence, not an organization. "caloriecontrol.org" sounds like a Web site about dieting. "caloriecontrolcouncil.org" sounds like the Web site of an industry organization, which is what this Web site is.

Posted by Beau Brendler at 04:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In the wake of our report on the credit industry's questionable use of the word "free" on its various Web sites, we were amused to see this e-mail offer from TransUnion:
"Lock and unlock your TransUnion report at the touch of a button," says the graphically enticing spam, uh, e-mail ad. "NEW! TrueCredit Lock now lets you determine who sees your TransUnion credit report and when. Lock and unlock your TransUnion credit report at any time...Prevent others from looking at your TransUnion credit report. Included FREE with your Credit Monitoring subscription..."
First off: Most people don't need credit monitoring. Read the report and see how you can use http://www.annualcreditreport.com to get three free credit reports a year -- you don't need to spend $120 to $160 a year on credit monitoring. Second: TransUnion is trying to entice you to sign up for credit monitoring with a "service" you might already have the right to for free.

You should know that 35 states plus the District of Columbia have passed credit freeze legislation. (Read the list of states here). If you have been a victim of identity theft, you can freeze your credit report for free in many states, $5 or $10 in others.
If you go to the TrueCredit Lock site, it's designed to sign you right up and get you started, but if you dig deep in the site under the "service agreement" link (which you can only get to from the home page by clicking the "terms of use" or "site map" link, so how would you know it was there?), below paragraphs of lawyerese, you get:
"In the event you purchase a product that includes TrueCredit Lock, you acknowledge that some of the features of TrueCredit lock may be available to you under the laws of certain states. In the event you cancel any subscription that includes TrueCredit Lock as a benefit you will cease receiving TrueCredit Lock upon cancellation.
"You acknowledge that TrueCredit Lock will only prevent delivery of your TransUnion credit report. It will not apply to your Equifax or Experian credit report. Remember that while a credit lock prevents most third party access to your credit report, a third party may access a locked report in certain instances that are considered a low risk for identity theft, such as official government investigations, collection activities and insurance underwriting and claims administration."
Got that? If you buy it, you acknowledge that you already knew you could get it for free if you're lucky enough to live in one of the 35 states?

Posted by Beau Brendler at 01:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)