ABSTRACT
Dramatic examples, such as Piltdown man, are useful in exposing major fraud, but they tacitly mischaracterize the problem of misinformation in research fields. Walsh actually is playing into the hands of those who like to distinguish between the purity of most science and the harm of some tiny minority who are unscrupulous. Scientists, like journalists, do not like grey areas; they like to see fraud against a background of purity, black versus white. It gives the impression of honour to scientists and drama to journalists.
