Change minds! Write a letter to the editor explaining why scientific research matters -- and contact your elected officials.
In support of protecting free and open scientific inquiry and publication, we are collecting short testimonials from researchers on the impact of censorship on their work and the broader community.
These testimonials are intended to briefly and concretely illustrate the impact of censorship on science as a public good. Examples of such censorship include: CDC’s ban on including words relating to gender in research publications, NSF’s recent move to freeze funding for work related to DEI, or NSF’s list of dozens of flagged words used to identify research that might violate President Donald Trump’s executive orders.
We may use these testimonials in public campaigns, including on this website, to raise public awareness of the profound dangers of limiting scientific inquiry and publications through censorship. It is crucial to help people understand how the U.S. Government's censorship of scientific inquiry and publications will harm us all.
Share your testimonial now! https://tinyurl.com/58xvcmuc
"As a researcher in civil rights history -- both as an author and a writer for the National Parks -- i am completely dependent on, and enthralled by, collections in libraries, museums and archives that reveal both the oppression of and resistance by Native Californians, formerly enslaved people, farmworkers, disenfranchised women and many others whose stories have been marginalized or silenced. Their stories are crucial to understanding our true history and our national parks are where many people learn this history. It must not be censored or erased by executive order."
--Elaine Elinson, Researcher/Author, Wherever There's a Fight: How Runaway Slaves, Suffragists, Immigrants, Strikers, and Poets Shaped Civil Liberties in California
"My research focuses on preventing adolescent substance use disorders. It is easy to dismiss prevention work as unnecessary because, when it works, we take its impact for granted. We don’t see the extra birthdays and lack of suffering as a victory but as inevitable. By restricting academic freedom and scientific inquiry, as the current administration has done, we are not able to continue the fight for a world free from the struggles of addiction. We have the tools to create the world we want to live in. What we need now is the will to build it."
--Andrew Moore, PhD, Medical University of South Carolina
"I am extremely concerned with the attack on vaccine research and the promotion of the anti-vaccine movement performed by the current US administration. The US has always been a reference in scientific issues, and now the US will be a leading light for all anti-vaxxers of the world. As a science communicator, I always try to debunk anti-vaxx myths — this is an integral part of my activity. Now it will be much more difficult for me — all anti-vaxxers will refer to the official claims of ignorant persons from the US administration."
--Georgy Kurakin, Biologist/Science communicator
"My research helps decision-makers understand when and where to expect pests that threaten agriculture in the United States. To do this, I need access to freely available and accessible weather and climate forecasts, as well as federal funding to support my salary. The removal of NOAA datasets and programs would significantly impact our ability to provide pest forecasts to farmers and growers. Additionally, the censorship of federal grant proposals to remove words related to climate change will impact my ability to focus on work that forecasts how pests may respond to increasing temperatures. Recently, I had to self-censor a USDA work place to remove the words 'climate change' just so it wouldn't get flagged. In short, these censorship activities will impact agriculture in the U.S. and make it nearly impossible for scientists like me to keep their jobs."
--Dr. Brittany Barker, Oregon State University
"As a researcher working on the evolution and development of biological sex, recent government censorship undermines my ability to teach, train students, and communicate my findings to the public. The pubic deserves to know how complex the biological basis of sex actually is. They should not have to rely on popularized and politicized opinion to understand the differences between males and females."
--Thomas Sanger, Associate Professor, Loyola University Chicago
--Amanda M. Fanniff, PhD, Associate Professor, Palo Alto University