Boy oh boy, the anti-vaping lobbyists love to spread lies about the vaping industry. They’ll stop at nothing, and the negative propaganda has been going on for quite some time. But in some cases, reporters just plain get things wrong. This was the case back in October of 2014 when a website called The Borneo Post ran an article reporting that a 53-year-old man was killed by an exploding e-cig. Wow! What kind of e-cig was this?
(Courtesy of VapePlenish)
Don’t worry. The story was immediately debunked but only after considerable pressure from the vaping and e-cig communities. To be fair, The Borneo Post did make a rather rapid correction to the story, but the harm had already been done. The anti-vaping movement jumped on the wrongly documented news story and spread it across the Internet like wildfire, even though they knew the story to be wrong.
It all started when a 53-year-old van driver from Bintu Tamu was fatally injured after his highly self-customized vape pen explodes and hits him in the chest. However, when The Borneo Post runs the story, they accidentally refer to the exploding device as an e-cig instead. This error seems to have been somewhat of a mistake on the reporter’s part, because one of the sources of the article, a man named Johnathan JK, steps forward and immediately notifies the journalist.
A picture of the exploding device was included in the news report, and to the vaping community, it is painfully obvious that this is no ordinary e-cig. As the story begins to make its rounds on social media, The Borneo Post comes under attack for misleading the public. Johnathan JK clarifies the differences between the two devices to Abang Ismail, the journalist of the original article. A retraction is made, but this is yet another example of how news reporters can sometimes unintentionally spread false information about the vaping industry, simply because they lack the fundamental understanding of the rapidly changing technology involved.
We’ve seen this before, falsified or wrongly documented news stories that give the anti-vaping movement more ammunition for yet another unsubstantiated attack against the vaping industry. From false claims of e-cigs containing everything from antifreeze to formaldehyde, the vaping community seems to always be battling some new form of negative propaganda that threatens our very existence. In this case, the reporter acts somewhat honorable by immediately issuing a retraction. Unfortunately, many “journalists” are not as decent and upright.