As a long-time reader and subscriber to Consumer Reports, I expect the utmost integrity from the magazine in terms of how they conduct their tests and communicate the results. That is what makes today’s news so surprising, and so interesting. They are facing their Tylenol moment. How will they handle it? Fisking their corporate statement,
CONSUMER REPORTS WITHDRAWS INFANT CAR SEAT REPORT
Move is made pending additional testing now underway
(is the fact that the testing is “now underway” supposed to make us feel better?)NEW YORK (Jan. 18) — Consumer Reports is withdrawing its recent report on infant car seats pending further tests of the performance of those seats in side-impact collisions.
A new report will be published with any necessary revisions as soon as possible after the new tests are complete.
We withdrew the report immediately upon discovering a substantive issue that may have affected the original test results. (If it was a substantive issue, it DID affect the results, why use weasel words like “may”?) The issue came to light based on new information received Tuesday night and Wednesday morning from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) concerning the speed at which our side-impact tests were conducted. (We didn’t check before publishing)
The original study, published in the February issue of Consumer Reports, was aimed at discovering how infant seats performed in tests at speeds that match those used in the governmentĂ¢??s New Car Assessment Program (NCAP). This program tests most new vehicles in crashes at speeds of 35 mph for frontal impact and 38 mph for side impact. Child safety seats, in contrast, are currently tested only in front-impact crashes at speeds of 30 mph.
Our tests were intended (It’s not our fault, its the NHTSA’s) to simulate side crashes at the NCAP speed of 38 mph. The new information raises a question (confirms) about whether the tests accurately simulated that speed, however, so we are now reviewing our tests and the resulting article. (…we never should have published in the first place)
To those who may have seen the report earlier in print, on the Web, or in broadcasts, we urge you to remember that use of any child seat is safer than no child seat, but to suspend judgment on the merits of individual products until the new testing has been completed and the report re-published. (How about an apology for not confirming that the testing was done as requested. How about a “sorry” to your loyal subscribers who fund the magazine for publishing a major spread that had to be rescinded within weeks. How about a little humility?)
We appreciate that manufacturers and particularly NHTSA are engaging directly with us on this article, and we applaud NHTSA for giving serious consideration to development of side-impact child seat tests. Consumer Reports has long advocated adoption of such tests, since government data shows that side crashes account for a significant number of child fatalities.(…and we deeply regret the error.)We look forward to re-issuing guidance on child-seat safety as soon as possible.(..and we reaffirm our commitment to be the highest standards of impartial and trustworthy product testing.)
A little too much arrogance and not enough contrition in that statement. Back on October 11, 1982, the Washington Post had this to say about Johnson & Johnson’s handling of the Tylenol scare,
..what Johnson & Johnson executives have done is communicate the message that the company is candid, contrite, and compassionate, committed to solving the murders and protecting the public.
J&J’s crisis management is THE case study to this day. Consumer Reports response is not in the same league and that is disappointing.