Conflict of interest (COI) editing involves contributing to Wikipedia about yourself, family, friends, clients, employers, or your financial or other relationships. Any external relationship can trigger a conflict of interest. (The word interest refers here to something in which a person has a stake.)[n 1]
Conflict of interest is not about actual bias. It is about a person's roles and relationships, and the tendency to bias that we assume exists when roles conflict.[3] That someone has a conflict of interest is a description of a situation. It is not a judgment about that person's state of mind or integrity.[n 2] (See #What is conflict of interest?)
COI editing is strongly discouraged. It undermines public confidence in Wikipedia, and risks causing public embarrassment to the individuals being promoted. If it causes disruption, accounts may be blocked. Editors with a financial conflict of interest, including paid editors, are advised not to edit affected articles. They may suggest changes on the talk page and must disclose their COI. Paid editors are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose who is paying them, on whose behalf the edits are made, and any other relevant affiliation. (See #Paid editing and Paid-contribution disclosure.)[6]
When investigating COI editing, do not reveal the identity of editors against their wishes; Wikipedia's policy against harassment takes precedence over this guideline. Editors discussing changes to this guideline should disclose whether they have been paid to edit Wikipedia.
Wikipedia guidelines | |||
---|---|---|---|
Behavioral guidelines | |||
|
|||
Content guidelines | |||
Editing guidelines | |||
|
|||
Style guidelines | |||
Deletion guidelines | |||
Other guideline categories | |||
Contents
- 1 Wikipedia's position
- 2 Declaring an interest
- 3 What is conflict of interest?
- 4 What is wrong with COI?
- 5 Financial conflict of interest
- 6 Edit requests from COI or paid editors
- 7 Copyright
- 8 Covert advertising, consumer protection
- 9 Other categories of COI
- 10 Miscellaneous
- 11 How to handle conflicts of interest
- 12 See also
- 13 Notes
- 14 References
- 15 Further reading
Wikipedia's position
Purpose of Wikipedia
As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia's mission is to provide the public with articles that summarize accepted knowledge, written neutrally and sourced reliably. Readers expect to find neutral articles written independently of their subject, not corporate or personal webpages, or platforms for advertising and self-promotion. Articles should contain only material that complies with Wikipedia's content policies and best practices, and Wikipedians must place the interests of the encyclopedia and its readers first.
COI editing strongly discouraged
COI editing is strongly discouraged. Editors with a COI should follow Wikipedia policies and best practices scrupulously, and may be blocked if they cause disruption. If you have a COI:
- You are strongly discouraged from editing affected articles.
- You may propose changes by using the {{request edit}} template on talk pages.
- You may propose changes on the conflict-of-interest noticeboard.
- Your proposals may or may not be acted upon.
- If you are being paid to edit, please respect volunteers by keeping discussions concise; see PAYTALK.
Note that you do not control articles. Others may add information that would otherwise have remained little known; decide to delete the article; or decide to keep it should you later request deletion. While Wikipedians generally avoid naming editors and their paymasters, other media routinely do. This has led at times to embarrassment for the organization concerned; see Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia.
Wikimedia Foundation terms of use
The Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use require that editors who are being paid for their contributions disclose their employer (the person or organization who is paying for the edits); the client (the organization or person on whose behalf the edits are made); and any other relevant affiliation. This is the policy of the English Wikipedia.
Declaring an interest
General COI
- Example of a general COI: suggesting an edit about your family member.
- Example of a financial COI: suggesting an edit about your own company.
If you become involved in an article where you have a general COI (including a financial COI) that does not involve being paid to edit Wikipedia, place the {{connected contributor}} template at the top of affected talk pages. Fill it in as follows, and save:
For a COI editor's talk-page declaration, see:
Talk:Godwin's Law.
- {{Connected contributor|User1=Your username |U1-declared=yes| |U1-otherlinks=Insert relevant affiliations, disclosures, article drafts, or diffs showing COI contributions.}}
In addition, disclose the COI on your user page and during any discussion about the topic. You can also make a statement in the edit summary of any COI contribution.
Paid editors
- Example of a paid COI: the subject of an article has paid you to influence its content.
If you are being paid for your contributions to Wikipedia, you must declare who is paying you, who the client is, and any other relevant role or relationship. Place the {{connected contributor (paid)}} template at the top of talk pages of affected articles. Fill it in as follows, and save:
For a paid editor's talk-page declaration, see:
Talk:Mia Farrow.
- {{Connected contributor (paid)|User1=Username of the paid editor|U1-employer=Name of person/organization that is paying for the edits|U1-client= Name of client|U1-otherlinks=Insert relevant affiliations, disclosures, article drafts, or diffs showing paid contributions.}}
In addition, make the disclosure on your main user page in a clearly visible list of your paid contributions; on article drafts in user space or elsewhere; and during any discussion about the topic elsewhere. You can also make a statement in the edit summary of any paid contribution. Paid editors must respect the volunteer nature of the project and keep discussions concise; see WP:PAYTALK.
Terminology
- The employer is whoever is paying you to be involved in the article (such as a PR company).
- The client is on whose behalf the payment is made (usually the subject of the article).
If the employer and client are the same entity – if Acme Corporation is paying you to make contributions about Acme Corporation – the client parameter can be left empty. See {{connected contributor (paid)}} for more information.
What is conflict of interest?
External roles and relationships
"P has a conflict of interest if, and only if, (1) P is in a relationship with another requiring P to exercise judgment in the other's behalf, and (2) P has a (special) interest tending to interfere with the proper exercise of judgment in that relationship."
While editing Wikipedia, an editor's primary role is to further the interests of the encyclopaedia. When an external role or relationship could reasonably be said to undermine that primary role, the editor has a conflict of interest. (Similarly, a judge's primary role as an impartial adjudicator is undermined if she is married to the defendant.)
Any external relationship – personal, religious, political, academic, financial, or legal – can trigger a COI. How close the relationship needs to be before it becomes a concern on Wikipedia is governed by common sense. For example, an article about a band should not be written by the band's manager, and a biography should not be an autobiography, or written by the subject's spouse.
Subject-matter experts are welcome to contribute within their areas of expertise, subject to the guidance on financial conflict of interest, while making sure that their external roles and relationships in that field do not interfere with their primary role on Wikipedia.
COI is not simply bias
Determining that someone has a COI is a description of a situation. It is not a judgment about that person's state of mind or integrity.[5]
A COI can exist in the absence of bias, and bias regularly exists in the absence of a COI. Beliefs and desires may lead to biased editing, but they do not constitute a COI. COI emerges from an editor's roles and relationships, and the tendency to bias that we assume exists when those roles and relationships conflict.[3] COI is like "dirt in a sensitive gauge."[8]
Actual, potential and apparent conflict of interest
An actual conflict of interest exists when an editor has a COI with respect to a certain judgment, and he is in a position where the judgment must be exercised.[9]
- Example: A company owner has an actual COI if he edits articles and engages in discussions about that company.
A potential conflict of interest exists when an editor has a COI with respect to a certain judgment, but she is not in a position where the judgment must be exercised.[n 4]
- Example: A company owner has a potential COI with respect to articles and discussions about her company, but she has no actual COI if she stays away from those pages.
An apparent conflict of interest exists when there is reason to believe that an editor has a COI.[n 5]
- Example: An editor has an apparent COI if he edits an article about a company and for some reason appears to be the company owner. In fact he may have no such connection. Apparent COI causes bad feeling within the community and should be resolved through discussion whenever possible.[n 6]
What is wrong with COI?
"A person is judged to have a conflict of interest on the basis of being in a conflicted situation, whether or not that person thinks he or she is capable of resisting the temptation or corrupting influence of the interest that could interfere with her judgment."
Until the latter half of the 20th century, the professions relied on the "virtue-centric approach," in which those with a COI were simply expected to act honourably and objectively.[n 8]
This is now known to have been naive.[4]:447 The virtue-centric approach underestimates the extent to which the judgment of individuals with a COI may be impaired. Conflicted individuals cannot know the extent to which they have been influenced; philosopher Michael Davis writes that they often "esteem too highly their own reliability."[13][14] For example, a conflicted person might overcompensate in an effort to be fair, leading to decisions he would otherwise not have made.[13]
The virtue-centric approach ignores the damage COI inflicts on public confidence, and the unease it causes within the affected community. If a judge is involved with a defendant, her role as an impartial adjudicator is undermined in the view of her colleagues and the public no matter how convinced she is that she can remain impartial.
Financial conflict of interest
Financial relationships
If you have a close financial relationship with a topic you wish to write about – including as an owner, employee, contractor or other stakeholder – you are advised to refrain from editing affected articles. You may suggest changes on the talk page of those articles, where you should disclose your COI. You can use the {{request edit}} template to suggest changes.
Paid contributions
Being paid to contribute to Wikipedia is one form of financial conflict of interest. Being paid to promote external interests on Wikipedia (known as "paid advocacy") is the type of paid contribution of most concern to the Wikipedia community, because edits by paid advocates invariably reflect the interests of the client or employer. Paid advocacy includes public relations, marketing and advertising.
Advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not. Paid advocacy is an especially egregious form; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice.[n 9]
If you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (whether money, goods, or services) for your contributions to Wikipedia:
- You are very strongly discouraged from editing affected articles.
- You may propose changes on talk pages by using the {{request edit}} template.
- You may propose changes on the conflict-of-interest noticeboard.
- You must disclose who is paying you (the "employer"); on whose behalf the edits are made (the "client"); and any other relevant affiliation.
- Supply that information on your user page; on affected talk pages using the {{connected contributor (paid)}} template; and whenever you discuss the topic.
- Please respect volunteers by keeping discussions concise; see PAYTALK.
Requested edits are subject to the same standards as any other, and editors may decline to act on them. To find an article's talk page, click the "talk" button at the top of the article. See WP:TEAHOUSE if you have questions about these things.
Wikipedians in residence
There are forms of paid editing that the Wikimedia community regards as benign. These include Wikipedians in residence (WiRs) – Wikipedians who are paid to collaborate with mission-aligned organizations, such as galleries, libraries, archives, and museums. WiRs must not engage in public relations or marketing for their organization, and they must operate within the bounds defined by Core characteristics of a Wikipedian in Residence at Wikimedia Outreach. They must work closely with a Wikipedia project or the general Wikipedia community, and are expected to identify their WiR status on their user page and on talk pages related to their organization when they post there.
Reward board
Another benign example of paid editing is the reward board, where editors can post incentives, usually to raise articles to featured-article or good-article status. If you participate in this kind of paid editing, transparency and neutrality are key.
Edit requests from COI or paid editors
Responding to requests
Editors should exercise caution when responding to edit requests from COI and paid editors, particularly when commercial interests are involved. When large amounts of text are added on behalf of the article subject, it means that the article has, in effect, been ghostwritten by them, without the readers' knowledge.
Editors responding to edit requests should carefully check the proposed text and sources. That an article has been expanded does not necessarily mean that it is better. Be on the lookout for unnecessary detail that may have been added to overwhelm something negative. In particular, editors should determine whether anything important is missing and whether the text complies with WP:DUE. If the proposed new text is added to the article, the edit summary should include full attribution; see WP:COIATTRIBUTE below.
Paid editors on talk pages
Paid editors must respect the volunteer nature of the project and keep discussions concise. When proposing changes to an article, they should describe the suggested modifications and explain why the changes should be made. Any changes that may be contentious, such as removal of negative text, should be highlighted.
To justify their salaries or fees, paid editors may submit billable hours, along with evidence of their talk-page posts. Volunteers should be aware of this before being drawn into long exchanges with such editors. No editor should be expected to engage in long or repetitive discussions with someone who is being paid to argue with them.
Editors who refuse to accept a consensus by arguing ad nauseam may find themselves in violation of the disruptive-editing guideline.
Copyright
Copyright of paid contributions
Editors are reminded that any text they contribute to Wikipedia, assuming they own the copyright, is irrevocably licensed under a Creative Commons-Attribution-Sharealike license and the GNU Free Documentation License. Content on Wikipedia, including article drafts and talk-page comments, can be freely copied and modified by third parties for commercial and non-commercial use, with the sole requirement that it be attributed to Wikipedia contributors.
Paid editors must ensure that they own the copyright of text they have been paid to add to Wikipedia. If the text is a work for hire, the copyright resides with the person or organization that paid for it ("the employer"). Otherwise the text's author is assumed to be the copyright holder. It is important not to assume that the paid editor is the author, because companies may provide paid editors with approved texts.
Paid editors, the employer, or the author should forward a release to the Wikimedia Foundation (permissions@wikimedia.org
). The release must include the name(s) of the author and copyright holder, and that the copyright holder has released the text under a free licence. See WP:PERMISSION for how to do this.
Attribution in edit summaries
If editors choose to add material to an article on behalf of a COI or paid editor, they must provide attribution for the text in the edit summary. The edit summary should include the name of the COI or paid editor, a link to the draft or edit request, and that the edit contains a COI or paid contribution. For example: "Text inserted on behalf of paid editor User:X; copied from Draft:Paid draft."
In addition to complying with copyright requirements, this transparency allows editors and readers to determine the extent of COI input into the article.
Covert advertising, consumer protection
United States Federal Trade Commission
All editors are expected to follow United States law on undisclosed advertising, which is described by the Federal Trade Commission at Endorsement Guidelines and Dot Com Disclosures.
European fair-trading law
In 2012 the Munich Oberlandesgericht court ruled that if a company or its agents edit Wikipedia with the aim of influencing customers, the edits constitute covert advertising, and as such are a violation of European fair-trading law. The ruling stated that readers cannot be expected to seek out user and talk pages to find editors' disclosures about their corporate affiliation.[16]
UK Advertising Standards Authority
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) in the UK found in 2012 that the content of tweets from two footballers had been "agreed with the help of a member of the Nike marketing team." The tweets were not clearly identified as Nike marketing communications, and were therefore in breach of the ASA's code.[17]
Other categories of COI
Legal and other disputes
The biographies of living persons policy says: "[A]n editor who is involved in a significant controversy or dispute with another individual – whether on- or off-wiki – or who is an avowed rival of that individual, should not edit that person's biography or other material about that person, given the potential conflict of interest."
If you are involved in a court case, or you are close to one of the litigants, you should not write about the case, or about a party or law firm associated with the case.
Campaigning, political
Activities regarded by insiders as simply "getting the word out" may appear promotional or propagandistic to the outside world. If you edit articles while involved with campaigns in the same area, you may have a conflict of interest. Political candidates and their staff should not edit articles about themselves, their supporters, or their opponents. Government employees should not edit articles about their agencies, government, political party, political opponents, or controversial political topics.
Writing about yourself, family, friends
You should not create or edit articles about yourself, your family, friends, or foes. If you have a personal connection to a topic or person, you are advised to refrain from editing those articles directly and to provide full disclosure of the connection if you comment about the article on talk pages or in other discussions.
An exception to editing an article about yourself or someone you know is made if the article contains defamation or a serious error that needs to be corrected quickly. If you do make such an edit, follow it up with an email to WP:OTRS, Wikipedia's volunteer response team, or ask for help on WP:BLPN, our noticeboard for articles about living persons.
Citing yourself
Using material you have written or published is allowed within reason, but only if it is relevant, conforms to the content policies, including WP:SELFPUB, and is not excessive. Citations should be in the third person and should not place undue emphasis on your work. When in doubt, defer to the community's opinion.
Cultural sector
Museum curators, librarians, archivists, and similar are encouraged to help improve Wikipedia, or to share their information in the form of links to their resources. If a link cannot be used as a reliable source, it may be placed under further reading or external links if it complies with the external links guideline. Bear in mind that Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files.
Miscellaneous
Law of unintended consequences
Once an article is created about yourself, your group, or your company, you have no right to control its content, or to delete it outside the normal channels. Content is irrevocably added with every edit. If there is anything publicly available on a topic that you would not want to have included in an article, it will probably find its way there eventually.
Do not create a shared organizational account, or use the name of an organization as the account name. The account is yours, not your employer's.
Making uncontroversial edits
Editors who have a general conflict of interest may make unambiguously uncontroversial edits (but see WP:FINANCIALCOI). They may:
- remove spam and unambiguous vandalism,
- remove unambiguous violations of the biography of living persons policy,
- fix spelling and grammatical errors,
- repair broken links,
- remove their own COI edits, and
- add independent reliable sources when another editor has requested them, although it is better to supply them on the talk page for others to add.
If another editor objects for any reason, it is not an uncontroversial edit. Edits not covered by the above should be discussed on the article's talk page. If an article has few involved editors, ask at the talk page of a related Wikiproject or at WP:COIN. Also see WP:COITALK.
Supplying photographs and media files
Editors with a COI are encouraged to upload high-quality media files that are appropriately licensed for Wikipedia and that improve our coverage of a subject. For more information, follow the instructions at Commons. In some cases, the addition of media files to an article may be an uncontroversial edit that editors with a COI can make directly, but editors should exercise discretion and rely on talk pages when images may be controversial or promotional. If the addition of an image is challenged by another editor, it is not uncontroversial.
How to handle conflicts of interest
If an editor has disclosed that s/he is editing with a COI, or edits in a way that leads you to believe they might have a COI, raise the issue in a civil manner on the editor's talk page, citing this guideline, or open a thread on WP:COIN. Avoid making disparaging comments about the subject of the article, its author, or the author's motives.
If there has been no COI disclosure, consider first whether the issue may be simple advocacy. The appropriate forum for concerns about advocacy is WP:NPOVN. The appropriate forum for concerns about sources is WP:RSN. If there are concerns about sockpuppets or meatpuppets, please bring that concern to WP:SPI.
Avoid outing
When investigating COI editing, the policy against harassment takes precedence. It requires that Wikipedians not reveal the identity of editors against their wishes. Instead, examine editors' behavior and refer if necessary to Wikipedia:Checkuser.
Dealing with single-purpose accounts
Accounts that appear to be single-purpose, existing for the sole or primary purpose of promotion or denigration of a person, company, product, service, website, organization, etc., and whose postings are in apparent violation of this guideline, should be made aware of this guideline and warned not to continue their problematic editing. If the same pattern of editing continues after the warning, the account may be blocked.
Templates
Relevant article talk pages may be tagged with {{connected contributor}} or {{connected contributor (paid)}}. The article itself may be tagged with {{COI}}. A section of an article can be tagged with {{COI|section}}
Other templates include:
- {{uw-coi}} (to warn editors who may have a conflict of interest)
- {{uw-coi-username}} (to warn editors whose username violates the WP:Usernames policy)
- {{COI editnotice}} (for article talk pages, provides instructions for conflicted editors to use edit requests)
See also
- Wikimedia Foundation
- Wikimedia:Terms of Use#4. Refraining from Certain Activities
- Sue Gardner, "Press releases/Sue Gardner statement paid advocacy editing", Wikimedia Foundation, 21 October 2013.
- Contact us
- Article
- Policies
- Wikiprojects
- Miscellaneous
- Category:Requested edits (lists edits for review where proposer has a conflict of interest)
- Category:Wikipedia articles with possible conflicts of interest
- Wikipedia:Reward board
- Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations
- User:COIBot
- Users creating autobiographies (an edit filter)
- Statement on Wikipedia from participating communications firms, June 2014
- Essays
- Wikipedia:Best practices for editors with close associations
- Wikipedia:Conflicts of interest (medicine)
- Wikipedia:Don't cry COI
- Wikipedia:For publicists publicizing a client's work
- Wikipedia:Ghostwriting
- Wikipedia:Independent sources
- Wikipedia:Paid editing (essay)
- Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide
- Wikipedia:Public relations (essay)
- Wikipedia:Search engine optimization
- Wikipedia:Wikipedia is in the real world
- Historical
- Wikipedia community discussion on paid editing, 2009.
- Wikipedia community discussion on conflict of interest, 2012.
- Wikipedia:COI+ (failed proposal, 21 February 2013)
- Commercial editing (failed policy proposal turned into an essay, November 2013)
- No paid advocacy (failed policy proposal, November 2013)
- Paid editing policy proposal (failed policy proposal, November 2013)
- Conflict of interest limit (failed policy proposal, December 2013)
Notes
- ^ Interest (from Middle English, interess) originally meant "the possession of a share in or a right to something."[1]
Neil R. Luebke, 1987: "[T]he term 'interest' [in 'conflict of interest'] means some actual share or right on the basis of which one can materially gain or lose. It does nor mean an affection for some person, a feeling of sympathy for some cause, or a desire for some area of activity. In this sense I could have an interest in the Bad-News-Corporation, through a generous bequest by my rich uncle, even though I detest its corporate practices and conscientiously refuse to buy its products."[2]
- ^ Wayne Norman, Chris McDonald, 2012: "A person has a conflict of interest because of the kind of situation she finds herself in, not simply because of the actual state of her own desires, interests, motives, and so on."[4]:447
Bernard Lo and Marilyn J. Field, Institute of Medicine, 2009: "A conflict of interest is a set of circumstances that creates a risk that professional judgment or actions regarding a primary interest will be unduly influenced by a secondary interest. ...
"Secondary interests may include not only financial gain but also the desire for professional advancement, recognition for personal achievement, and favors to friends and family or to students and colleagues ...
"[Conflict of interest] policies do not ... imply that the individual researcher ... is an unethical person. They assume only that under some conditions a risk exists that the decisions may be unduly influenced by considerations that should be irrelevant. ... the determination that an individual or institution has a conflict of interest is a judgment about the situation and not about the ... [person] who happens to be in that situation."[5]
- ^ Davies writes: "A conflict of interest is a situation in which some person P (whether an individual or corporate body) stands in a certain relation to one or more decisions. On the standard view, P has a conflict of interest if, and only if, (1) P is in a relationship with another requiring P to exercise judgment in the other's behalf and (2) P has a (special) interest tending to interfere with the proper exercise of judgment in that relationship. The crucial terms in the standard view are 'relationship,' 'judgment,' 'interest,' and 'proper exercise.'"[7][4]:445
- ^ Columbia University, Responsible Conduct of Research: "A potential conflict of interest involves a situation that may develop into an actual conflict of interest."[10][9]
- ^ "An apparent conflict of interest is one in which a reasonable person would think that the professional's judgment is likely to be compromised."[10][11]
- ^ One approach is to disclose personal information, either on Wikipedia or privately to a trusted editor, although editors should not feel obligated to do this.
- ^ Norman and McDonald quote legal scholar Bayless Manning, 1964: "[S]ubjective intent is not important [in conflict of interest law] ... If the wrong kind of outside interest is held, no amount of leaning over backward or purity of soul will satisfy [a confirmation] Committee or the statutes."[4]:447
- ^ The first court case to use the term conflict of interest as currently understood was in 1949 in New York.[12] Until the 1950s COI in the professions was addressed by expecting the conflicted individual to act objectively. Norman and McDonald write that this was naive.[13]
- ^ Sue Gardner, then executive director of the Wikimedia Foundation, wrote in 2013: "Editing-for-pay has been a divisive topic inside Wikipedia for many years, particularly when the edits to articles are promotional in nature. Unlike a university professor editing Wikipedia articles in their area of expertise, paid editing for promotional purposes, or paid advocacy editing as we call it, is extremely problematic. We consider it a "black hat" practice. Paid advocacy editing violates the core principles that have made Wikipedia so valuable for so many people."[15]
References
- ^ Jay M. Feinman (ed.), One Thousand and One Legal Words You Need to Know, Oxford University Press, 2005, p. 100.
Angus Stevenson, Maurice Waite (eds.), Concise Oxford English Dictionary (luxury edition), Oxford University Press, 2011, p. 740.
- ^ Neil R. Luebke, "Conflict of Interest as a Moral Category," Business & Professional Ethics Journal, 6, 1987 (pp. 66–81), p. 68. JSTOR 27799930
- ^ a b Michael Davis, "Introduction," in Michael Davis and Andrew Stark (eds.), Conflict of Interest in the Professions, University of Oxford Press, 2001, p. 12.
- ^ a b c d Wayne Norman, Chris McDonald, "Conflicts of Interest," in George G. Brenkert, Tom L. Beauchamp (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Business Ethics, Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 441–470.
- ^ a b Bernard Lo and Marilyn J. Field (eds.), Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education, and Practice, Institute of Medicine, National Academies Press, 2009, p. 49.
- ^ "Paid contributions without disclosure", Terms of Use, Wikimedia Foundation.
- ^ Davis 2001, p. 8.
- ^ Davis 2001, p. 11.
- ^ a b Davis 2001, p. 15.
- ^ a b "Conflicts of interest", Responsible Conduct of Research, Columbia University.
- ^ Davis 2001, p. 18.
- ^ Davis 2001, p. 303, citing In Re Equitable Office Bldg. Corporation, 83 F. Supp. 531 (S.D.N.Y 1949).
- ^ a b c Norman and McDonald, 2012, p. 461.
- ^ Davis 2001, pp. 11–12.
- ^ Sue Gardner, "Press releases/Sue Gardner statement paid advocacy editing", Wikimedia Foundation, 21 October 2013.
- ^ The case arose out of a claim against a company by a competitor over edits made to the article Weihrauchpräparat on the German Wikipedia. The judgment can be read here.
- ^ Mike Sweney, "Nike becomes first UK company to have Twitter campaign banned", The Guardian, 20 June 2012.
Further reading
- (chronological order)
- Michael Davis, "Conflict of Interest," Business and Professional Ethics Journal, 1(4), 1982, pp. 17–27 (influential)
- Luebke, Neil R. "Conflict of Interest as a Moral Category," Business & Professional Ethics Journal, 6, 1987, pp. 66–81. JSTOR 27799930 (influential)
- Michael Davis, "Conflict of Interest Revisited," Business & Professional Ethics Journal, 12(4), Winter 1993, pp. 21–41. JSTOR 27800924
- Michael Davis, Andrew Stark (eds.), Conflict of Interest in the Professions, University of Oxford Press, 2001.
- Andrew Stark, Conflict of Interest in American Public Life, Harvard University Press, 2003.
- Thomas L. Carson, "Conflicts of Interest and Self-Dealing in the Professions: A Review Essay," Business Ethics Quarterly, 14(1), January 2004, pp. 161–182. JSTOR 3857777
- Sheldon Krimsky, "The Ethical and Legal Foundations of Scientific 'Conflict of Interest'", in Trudo Lemmings and Duff R. Waring (eds.), Law and Ethics in Biomedical Research: Regulation, Conflict of Interest, and Liability, University of Toronto Press, 2006.
- Michael McDonald, "Ethics and Conflict of Interest", The W. Maurice Young Center for Applied Ethics, University of British Columbia, 23 April 2006.
- Bernard Lo and Marilyn J. Field (eds.), Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education, and Practice, National Academies Press, 2009.
- Wayne Norman, Chris McDonald, "Conflicts of Interest", in George G. Brenkert, Tom L. Beauchamp (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Business Ethics, Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 441–470.
|