I have been following the ideological capture of our scientific institutions, and today I have some fascinating data to share.
The progressive attempts to push pseudoscience on Americans are reaping some unintended consequences.
In 2020, the British weekly scientific journal Nature decided to weigh in on the general election and endorsed Biden for president.
The reasoning is laughable now, especially in light of the economy-crushing, liberty-depleting, and unscientific policies the current administration unleashes.
If elected, Biden would have the chance to reinstate and strengthen the climate and environmental regulations rolled back under Trump; restore the EPA’s depleted scientific capacity; and return the CDC’s leadership role in the pandemic. He should also move to reverse egregious policies on immigration and student visas, and hold the United States to its international commitments — not least its membership of the WHO and UNESCO.Donald Trump has taken an axe to a system that was intended to safeguard and protect citizens when leaders go astray. He has become an icon for those who seek to sow hatred and division, not only in the United States, but in other countries, too.
A new study published in a Nature Human Behavior paper by Floyd Jiuyun Zhang of Stanford University shows that the endorsement came with diminished trust in science and its “experts.” In his research, Zhang asked both Trump and Biden supporters to read a summary of the Nature editorial, a screenshot of the editorial’s headline, and the first paragraph of the endorsement.
Zhang, a Stanford Graduate School of Business student, then asked the participants to complete a survey after being told a set of questions. Participants were also informed that the publication is “one of the most-cited and most prestigious peer-reviewed scientific journals in the world.”
His online survey of 4,260 people demonstrated that Nature’s political endorsement did not influence votes and reduced trust in the publication among voters of the endorsed candidate’s opponent.
This study shows that electoral endorsements by Nature and potentially other scientific journals or organizations can undermine public trust in the endorser, particularly among supporters of the out-party candidate. This has negative impacts on trust in the scientific community as a whole and on information acquisition behaviours with respect to critical public health issues. Positive effects among supporters of the endorsed candidate are null or small, and they do not offset the negative effects among the opposite camp. This probably results in a lower overall level of public confidence and more polarization along the party line. There is little evidence that seeing the endorsement message changes opinions about the candidates.
While the above conclusion could lead one to conclude that only Trump supporters find scientific experts substantially less credible nowadays, let’s turn to the second data point.
Social media is now streaming footage from a promotional video for the latest season of PBS’ biographical television series “American Masters,” featuring former White House Coronavirus advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci and Washington D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser in newly released footage of the pair campaigning for covid vaccinations around in 2021.
One resident was not buying anything Bowser or Fauci were selling.
Fauci explains that the technology to develop the vaccine had been in the works for two decades, adding that some 30,000 people died from the flu in 2020 compared to the roughly 600,000 deaths from COVID-19 as of the time of the video.But the man brushes him off, saying: “Again, that’s you all’s number.”He remains unconvinced and expresses misgivings about various incentives that were offered at the time to people who agreed to be vaccinated.“When you start talking about paying people to get vaccinated, when you start talking about incentivizing things to get people vaccinated, it’s something else going on with that,” he says.“Your campaign is about fear. It’s about inciting fear in people. You all attack people with fear. That’s what this pandemic is — it’s a fear, it’s fear, this pandemic. That’s all it is,” the man adds before Fauci and Bowser walk away.Later, a woman tells them: “I heard that [the vaccine] doesn’t cure it, and it doesn’t stop you from getting it.”Fauci tries to correct her.
The man’s assessment is direct and compelling. Bowser and Fauci came off as condescending, arrogant, and entitled to obedience.
I will also point out that Washington, D.C. is hardly MAGA country.
Yet, the Editor-in-Chief of the Science Family of Journals is bitterly clinging to his belief that delving into politics and pushing narratives is good.
The data suggest just the opposite. Hopefully, the trend continues, and we can return to the days scientists quested for knowledge and facts rather than social media hits, diversity points, narrative promotion, and politically-directed grants.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY