Update. "PLOS [@PLOS] statement on recent US Executive Orders and scientific integrity"
https://theplosblog.plos.org/2025/02/plos-statement-on-recent-us-executive-orders-and-scientific-integrity/
"We are deeply concerned about a range of recent US Executive Orders that collectively have the potential to dismantle the US scientific enterprise as it has existed for the past 70 years…We will not approve changes to terminology or removal of data that compromise the scientific accuracy of content. Requests to remove legitimate authors from manuscripts violate our authorship policies which are grounded in principles of credit, accountability and transparency…We are actively working to understand the evolving implications of these directives and the disruption they have brought…We remain dedicated to the advancement of #OpenScience."
#Censorship #DefendResearch #PLOS #Takedowns #Trump #USPol #USPolitics
So, @micahflee has a great piece about how authors should leave Substack because it is "brologarchy garbage" and more expensive than alternative Ghost.
And, got to wondering if authors knew how many potential subscribers they were losing by publishing on the much hated platform.
Here are the results of yesterday's poll on the subject. 81% of 472 people said they would never subscribe to someone's #Substack even if they really wanted to subscribe to their newsletter.
A lot of us know by now that Substack has a Nazi problem. It not only profits from fascist voices, it actively promotes their work and recruits them. And it's funded by Silicon Valley anti-democracy billionaires like Marc Andreesen — the same type of people who are, right now, raiding the US government to basically cut funding for social services and scientific research, and to steal money for themselves.
If the enemy wants you to despair it is actually politically useful to explore hope as a discipline, as a practice, something to do, a verb.
Want some help? Spend some time listening to and reading James Baldwin.