A report by Slate’s Jordan Ellenberg discusses the methodological knicker-twisting that two Heritage Foundation researchers have recently engaged in. A published study by two academic sociologists found that teenagers’ "virginity pledges" had no significant impact on sexual diseases. The researchers at Heritage – a conservative thinktank – then used clearly dubious means to critique the findings.
Of course, this kind of thing isn’t unknown in Australia. I suspect 4/5 of those who describe themselves as immigration researchers would not publish a finding that showed any downsides of immigration. I’d be greatly surprised if the Centre for Independent Studies ever did research that concluded that inequality causes any problems for society. ACIRRT is unlikely to publish a study showing that raising the minimum wage costs jobs. And the Australia Institute will probably never put out a finding showing that economic growth is good.
This is less of a problem for organisations whose "research" mostly consists of pulling together literature reviews, but it does become serious when organisations claim to have gone to the data and produced new findings.