Biden’s Censorship Of Science Called Out By Reporter

The National Science Foundation (NSF) has come under fire for handling public relations and alleged censorship, prompting criticism from Daily Caller News Foundation reporter Katelynn Richardson. At a recent House Judiciary Committee hearing, Richardson raised concerns about the NSF’s media strategy and its consideration of a list of conservative media outlets to avoid.

According to a House Judiciary Committee report, the NSF had developed a media strategy that included deflecting questions and even contemplated creating a list of conservative media outlets not to engage with. These revelations came to light after Richardson reported on the NSF’s research plan, known as “Track F,” and linked to videos on “misinformation” produced by the agency. In response, NSF program manager Michael Pozmantier was willing to remove these videos.

During the hearing, Republican Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie questioned Richardson about the aftermath of her report. Richardson revealed that the NSF had crafted a media strategy to deflect questions and labeled their messaging “pro-democracy,” which she found ironic.

The NSF’s expenditure on combating “misinformation” has also raised eyebrows. According to a Foundation For Freedom Online (FFO) report, the NSF has spent nearly $39 million on research programs related to combating “misinformation” since President Joe Biden’s inauguration in November 2022. In light of FFO’s report, the NSF awarded additional grants to counter mis- and disinformation, primarily under the “Convergence Accelerator Track F: Trust & Authenticity in Communication Systems” or “Secure and Trustworthy Cyberspace (SaTC)” categories.

Richardson expressed her concerns about the NSF’s handling of information and its lack of transparency. She questioned the agency’s credibility in determining what is accurate and authoritative if its response to fair questions from journalists is to strategize ways to rebrand and avoid attention.

These developments have ignited a broader discussion about the role of the NSF in funding research programs related to information and communication systems. Critics argue that if the agency’s instinct is to hide information and manipulate its public image, it raises doubts about its ability to discern what information is reliable and trustworthy.

The NSF’s public relations efforts and alleged censorship have become a subject of scrutiny, prompting calls for increased transparency and accountability. As the debate continues, ensuring that the agency’s actions align with its mission of promoting scientific knowledge and fostering public trust is crucial.