But if your company has a less revealing, more magisterial
name and the patients who contact you assume that your imprimatur
represents an unbiased evaluation, then you're giving me flulike
symptoms (morally speaking). Your long lists are dubious and your
exclusive listings even worse, a judgment that encompasses both
your company and the doctors who pay you.
Rather than speculate about what impression patients "may
get," you simply should tell them, clearly and succinctly, how
your service works. There's nothing dire in proffering the names
of service providers who pay to be listed - the Yellow Pages work
that way -- as long as that arrangement is transparent. Google,
for example, identifies "sponsored links," making it apparent
which listings have been purchased. But while this clarity would
be an ethical improvement, your service would remain a poor way
for a patient to choose a physician, one that sidesteps any
discussion of a physician's merits.
UPDATE: The company folded this spring. "We weren't getting
enough interest from potential patients," S.B. says.
(Readers can direct their questions and comments by e-mail to
ethicist@nytimes.com. This column originates in
The New York Times Magazine.)
COPYRIGHT 2008 UNIVERSAL PRESS SYNDICATE