In late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century Germany, the integration of product-evaluating certificates and reports (Gutachten) into advertisements triggered repeated condemnations of “advertisement-Gutachten” (Reklamegutachten), and scientists and science administrators introduced various restrictions to prevent the appearance of such documents. At the same time, the provision of Gutachten to private individuals and firms seemed crucial to the success of many private and public laboratories. Some chemical and other professionals, moreover, argued that the authoring and use of Reklamegutachten could represent a “scientific” and, therefore, ethical practice. By examining the contested history of the advertisement-Gutachten, this article reveals how a previously tolerated knowledge service lost its legitimacy in a particular place and period of time, and highlights the challenges of eliminating this practice or restoring its legitimacy afterward. The article also explores how professional scientists’ approaches to maintaining a reputation for integrity in the face of commercial and competitive pressures related to the better-known efforts of professionals in other fields, particularly the medical. I emphasize that, in determining whether a Gutachten qualified as scientific, the nature and transparency of the underlying research process was only one of the criteria that were considered, and often not the most significant yardstick. At the same time, however, ideas about the personal and professional/institutional integrity of providers of Gutachten were inextricably connected with assessments of the honesty and objectivity of their research.

中文翻译：

---

科学家和广告：德意志帝国的 Reklamegutachten

在 19 世纪末 20 世纪初的德国，将产品评估证书和报告（Gutachten）整合到广告中引发了对“广告-Gutachten”（Reklamegutachten）的反复谴责，科学家和科学管理人员引入了各种限制以防止出现此类文件。与此同时，向私人和公司提供 Gutachten 似乎对许多私人和公共实验室的成功至关重要。此外，一些化学和其他专业人士认为，Reklamegutachten 的创作和使用可以代表一种“科学”，因此也是一种道德实践。通过检查广告-Gutachten 的争议历史，本文揭示了以前被容忍的知识服务如何在特定地点和时间段失去其合法性，并强调了消除这种做法或在此之后恢复其合法性的挑战。本文还探讨了专业科学家如何在面临商业和竞争压力时保持诚信声誉的方法，这些压力与其他领域（尤其是医学）专业人士的知名努力相关。我强调，在确定 Gutachten 是否符合科学条件时，基础研究过程的性质和透明度只是考虑的标准之一，通常不是最重要的衡量标准。然而与此同时，