4 ms·

Claims of an EPA “publication freeze” look overstated. Two staffers say they were told to pause, HQ flatly denies it, and no memo has surfaced. Most likely it i

Claims of an EPA “publication freeze” look overstated. Two staffers say they were told to pause, HQ flatly denies it, and no memo has surfaced. Most likely it is a clearance bottleneck tied to the reorg that killed ORD. To staff it feels like censorship, to leadership it is process. Until documents leak I treat this as local slowdown, not agency-wide gag. The bigger story is the reorg itself which centralizes control and raises interference risk.

ImPostingOnHN 1y ago
> Two staffers say they were told to pause, HQ flatly denies it Presenting these two pieces of evidence in juxtaposition, as if they are equally trustworthy, is a bit misleading: I think we're all well aware that pretty much any given career scientist, particularly one who has chosen to dedicate their lives to public service, is more trustworthy than the current administration, which is on record with tens of thousands of lies, most so lazily told as to convey contempt for the listener: They either think you're stupid enough to believe them, or don't care whether you do. To take just one characteristic example out of the tens of thousands: the person ruling over the administration infamously hand-edited a weather map with a marker, to lie to the public about the path of a hurricane, then lied to the public about the markup itself to conceal the previous lie. Notably, they never even acknowledged either lie, much less apologized, meaning they still think it was a good idea, and still think that sort of blatant, shameless lying is ok. That's to say nothing of the disdain the administration has for government and science in general: the long, strong track record there belies any claims of good faith, and indicates that actions they take which worsen one or both, do so with that as the primary motivation.
- firesteelrain 1y ago
  Probably less a grand gag order and more a clearance choke point from the reorg, but in a hostile political climate even routine slowdowns look like censorship.
  - ImPostingOnHN 1y ago
    More likely, based on the evidence, is more lies by the administration on the pile of tens of thousands, and another example of actual censorship by the administration historically most famous for it. For an administration which claims that their primary goal is removing bureaucracy and making the government more efficient and effective, these whistleblower reports describing the exact opposite are pretty damning, and the objective is clear to all.
    - firesteelrain 1y ago
      Could be, but whistleblower reports without documents are still thin evidence. Bureaucratic reshuffles often cause real slowdowns even without explicit orders. If a memo surfaces that shows politicals blocking publications, then it’s censorship. Until then it looks more like dysfunction weaponized by the broader political context.
      - ImPostingOnHN 1y ago
        Maybe, but whistleblower reports are solid evidence on their own, multiple corroborating witness statements even moreso. That's even if they aren't going up against the administration most infamous for lying and censorship, which obviously strengthens the whistleblowers' cases. For an administration which claims that their primary goals are removing dysfunction and bureaucracy, and making the government more efficient and effective, these whistleblower reports describing the exact opposite are pretty damning, and the objective is clear to all. Unless we get evidence to the contrary, the most likely explanation is that the administration most infamous for censoring and lying is censoring and lying.
        firesteelrain 1y ago
        Fair enough, I see where you’re coming from. Personally I’d want to see documents or journal confirmations before calling it outright censorship, but I agree the political track record makes it hard to dismiss the reports.
jfengel 1y ago
It sounds like more "flooding the zone". Which parts are burying science and which parts are merely organizational incompetence? There's no way to sort it out because there are new incidents every day.
janice1999 1y ago
Culling staff and organisations in ways that lead to bottlenecks or institutional disorder is a classic suppression and censorship tactic. It's naive to think otherwise, especially given the current leadership.
fmbb 1y ago
This administration does not seem to work via memos or anything with a paper trail.
- baobabKoodaa 1y ago
  Related: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBdGOrcUEg8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBdGOrcUEg8
notmyjob 1y ago
Well, potato potatoe.
blactuary 1y ago
> HQ flatly denies it "HQ" believes climate change is a hoax, and this admin lies about anything and everything, we cannot take anything they say at face value

ImPostingOnHN 1y ago

> Two staffers say they were told to pause, HQ flatly denies it Presenting these two pieces of evidence in juxtaposition, as if they are equally trustworthy, is a bit misleading: I think we're all well aware that pretty much any given career scientist, particularly one who has chosen to dedicate their lives to public service, is more trustworthy than the current administration, which is on record with tens of thousands of lies, most so lazily told as to convey contempt for the listener: They either think you're stupid enough to believe them, or don't care whether you do. To take just one characteristic example out of the tens of thousands: the person ruling over the administration infamously hand-edited a weather map with a marker, to lie to the public about the path of a hurricane, then lied to the public about the markup itself to conceal the previous lie. Notably, they never even acknowledged either lie, much less apologized, meaning they still think it was a good idea, and still think that sort of blatant, shameless lying is ok. That's to say nothing of the disdain the administration has for government and science in general: the long, strong track record there belies any claims of good faith, and indicates that actions they take which worsen one or both, do so with that as the primary motivation.

firesteelrain 1y ago
Probably less a grand gag order and more a clearance choke point from the reorg, but in a hostile political climate even routine slowdowns look like censorship.
- ImPostingOnHN 1y ago
  More likely, based on the evidence, is more lies by the administration on the pile of tens of thousands, and another example of actual censorship by the administration historically most famous for it. For an administration which claims that their primary goal is removing bureaucracy and making the government more efficient and effective, these whistleblower reports describing the exact opposite are pretty damning, and the objective is clear to all.
  - firesteelrain 1y ago
    Could be, but whistleblower reports without documents are still thin evidence. Bureaucratic reshuffles often cause real slowdowns even without explicit orders. If a memo surfaces that shows politicals blocking publications, then it’s censorship. Until then it looks more like dysfunction weaponized by the broader political context.
    - ImPostingOnHN 1y ago
      Maybe, but whistleblower reports are solid evidence on their own, multiple corroborating witness statements even moreso. That's even if they aren't going up against the administration most infamous for lying and censorship, which obviously strengthens the whistleblowers' cases. For an administration which claims that their primary goals are removing dysfunction and bureaucracy, and making the government more efficient and effective, these whistleblower reports describing the exact opposite are pretty damning, and the objective is clear to all. Unless we get evidence to the contrary, the most likely explanation is that the administration most infamous for censoring and lying is censoring and lying.
      - firesteelrain 1y ago
        Fair enough, I see where you’re coming from. Personally I’d want to see documents or journal confirmations before calling it outright censorship, but I agree the political track record makes it hard to dismiss the reports.

jfengel 1y ago

It sounds like more "flooding the zone". Which parts are burying science and which parts are merely organizational incompetence? There's no way to sort it out because there are new incidents every day.

janice1999 1y ago

Culling staff and organisations in ways that lead to bottlenecks or institutional disorder is a classic suppression and censorship tactic. It's naive to think otherwise, especially given the current leadership.

fmbb 1y ago

This administration does not seem to work via memos or anything with a paper trail.

baobabKoodaa 1y ago
Related: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBdGOrcUEg8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBdGOrcUEg8

notmyjob 1y ago

Well, potato potatoe.

blactuary 1y ago

> HQ flatly denies it "HQ" believes climate change is a hoax, and this admin lies about anything and everything, we cannot take anything they say at face value