This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: Certainly, as Dr Rennie suggests,¹ the Massachusetts Medical Society (MMS) is very much aware of its responsibilities as steward of the New England Journal of Medicine. We know that our guarantee of editorial independence is a necessary condition for the integrity of content. Furthermore, as Rennie points out, the editorial independence of the journal's editors has never been in dispute. Rather than dictate content, our role as publishers is to provide an environment in which editors and their colleagues are free to explore all areas of medicine and to follow the truth, wherever it leads them.

However, even in an age when it is fashionable to believe the worst about people, commentators better serve their readers and their publication when they move beyond reflexive cynicism. Moreover, those who enjoy editorial independence must use their bully pulpit responsibly. Unfortunately, in his discussion about the recent departure of . . . [Full Text of this Article]

RELATED ARTICLE

Editors and Owners—Stretching Reputation Too Far
Drummond Rennie
JAMA. 1999;282(8):783-784.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

The relative myth of elective single embryo transfer
Gleicher and Barad
Hum Reprod 2006;21:1337-1344.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT