Yet though academic departments and students are often short-changed in the process, most universities look the other way. Perhaps the major problem with conflicts of interest involving academics who have a financial stake in the outcome of their research is that it distorts the policy process. An illustration of the policy impact of sponsored research is the case of University of Florida criminology professor Charles Thomas who for 20 years was the relentless advocate of prison privatisation. He turned out to have been on the payroll of private corrections companies all along, and was also as a significant shareholder in those companies. Academic disciplines that should in theory be concerned about the relations between universities and the marketplace pay scant attention to these issues.
Departments of education are busy exploring the latest educational fads.
The social sciences are mostly preoccupied with quantification and abstraction. Business schools are cheerleaders for whatever generates profits. The NEJM is hugely influential, and it had taken a strong stand on medical ethics and established stringent ethical guidelines for its contributors. It was only after the Los Angeles Times report that the soul-searching began and an internal inquiry was held. Then it emerged that reviewers of new drugs had disclosed financial ties to the NEJM editors.