Recent work in formal social epistemology has employed agent-based models from the Bala-Goyal framework to study the mechanisms involved when the so-called "Tobacco strategy" undermines collective inquiry. Motivated by limitations of these models, we propose an alternative based on a recently introduced framework for normative argument exchange across networks. We implement representations of two distinct types of industry influence: 'Obfuscating' directs inquiry to experiments with low expected value of information. 'Misleading' filters private research and only communicates misleading signals from the world. We explored the impacts of both strategies on the polarization & mean error of, and flow of information through, social networks of scientists via computer simulations. We conclude that even against highly optimistic background assumptions and in a less simplified model of inquiry, industry influence poses a significant potential threat.