Publication bias is a huge issue is some academic fields. What are the earliest accounts of publication bias?
As requested in the comments, publication bias intuitively means that if you read one article showing that drug X works to treat disease Y, you should wonder how many articles showing the same drug has no affect are unpublished due to the habits of publishing only positive results.
Here is a video explaining what publication bias is (15 minutes, worth watching if not familiar with publication bias):
Half of all clinical trials ever completed on the medical treatments currently in use have never been published in the medical literature. Trials with positive results for the test treatment are about twice as likely to be published, and this applies to both academic research and industry studies.
Definition from the Wikipedia page on publication bias:
Publication bias is a bias with regard to what is likely to be published, among what is available to be published. Not all bias is inherently problematic – for instance, a bias against publishing lies is often a desirable bias – but one problematic and much-discussed bias is the tendency of researchers, editors, and pharmaceutical companies to handle the reporting of experimental results that are positive (i.e. showing a significant finding) differently from results that are negative (i.e. supporting the null hypothesis) or inconclusive, leading to a misleading bias in the overall published literature.