There's more wrong with this OPA study
While I generally agree with Russ Fradin's post on Ad Age, I think it's simpler to say that the reason why this study done by OPA isn't right is bias: If you look at the organizations supporting OPA, the "results" of this study are in their favor (of course).
Paying someone to perform a study for you that usually results in positive results for you though is commonplace. I suppose I should give OPA a pass since the drug industry uses this method to get drug trials done. They fund a third party to conduct the trial. I shouldn't have to say this, but doing a study on drug safety is more important the OPA.
I started with an article saying how biased this OPA study is and ended scaring myself about drug safety.
(Another example of this is audits for publicly traded companies. The SEC requires them, but the company that gets the audit is the one that funds and controls its budget.)
