Showing posts with label data manipulation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label data manipulation. Show all posts

Friday, August 29, 2025

Trump Is Ruling by Willful Blindness; The New York Times, August 29, 2025

Hannah Bloch-Wehba, The New York Times; Trump Is Ruling by Willful Blindness


[Kip Currier: This article's author chillingly dissects Trump 's "Execute Order 66-esque" war on information and data. 

Data, in essence, is evidence. And without evidence -- in a court of law, a research laboratory, or a governmental agency  -- it becomes harder to make a case for laws, ethics, and policy. Without data and information, authoritarians can project the sense that they are unfettered by adherence to logic and scientific validity and are inoculated from accountability and the rule of law. In short, they can do whatever they want or don't want to do.

"Destroy, distort, and disregard data" is right out of the authoritarian playbook. Orwell's 1984 showed us that in a work of fiction. But it's on stark display in the real world, too. 

Reading this piece, I recalled having heard about the conservative Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government having literally destroyed hundreds of years of fisheries and environmental data. As Vice reported in 2015 (see The Harper Government Has Trashed and Destroyed Environmental Books and Documents):

In the first few days of 2014, scientists, journalists, and environmentalists were horrified to discover that the Harper government had begun a process to close seven of the 11 of Canada’s world-renowned Department of Fisheries and Oceans libraries, citing a consolidation and digitizing effort as the reason. Reports immediately proliferated that the process was undertaken in careless haste, with the officials sent to gather and transfer the documents allegedly neglecting to take proper inventory of the centuries’ worth of documents containing vital information on environmental life, from aquatic ecosystems to water safety and polar research, with some documents reportedly dumped in landfills or burned, leading some scientists to refer to it as a ‘libricide.’ 


Soon after, a widely disseminated photograph emerged displaying a dumpster at the Maurice Lamontage Institute in Mont-Joli Quebec, stuffed with hundreds of carelessly discarded historic books and documents. In Winnipeg, Gaile Whelan-Enns, an environmental researcher with the Manitoba Wildlands told CBC News that he saved hundreds of documents that he found abandoned in an empty library. “It was really hard to figure out where to start because there was so many documents that you just went ‘Oh my God,’” he said, disbelief palpable in his voice. “They just left this lying here?” 

The incautious nature of the consolidation effort adds another alarming chapter to a Harper government that appears deadset on directing how scientific research is conducted in Canada. Last Sunday, CBC’s the Fifth Estate aired an investigation on how the Harper government has dealt with scientists over the past seven years. The doc illustrated a battle between an ideology driven administration and mostly apolitical scientists simply pursuing the facts gleaned from their research, and how it led many to be silenced and defunded.

            https://www.vice.com/en/article/the-harper-government-has-trashed-and-burned-environmental-books-and-documents/  


Sound familiar at all?]

[Excerpt]

"The Trump administration has identified a key weapon in its campaign to remake the federal government: information control. Shortly after taking office, it ordered federal health agencies to freeze their communications with the public. The government promptly scrubbed many of its websites of data about climate change, public health, foreign aid and education. The Department of Government Efficiency slashed federal data-gathering activities, and the president fired the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics after a middling July jobs report.

As a scholar of information law and policy, I see a dangerous transformation: Instead of using data to determine how to govern, the administration is manipulating, ignoring and even jettisoning data altogether. Those who balk at the administration’s wishful thinking about reality face threats to fall in line or leave, as Jerome Powell, Lisa Cook and now the C.D.C. director, Susan Monarez, have all experienced.

The administration has clearly embraced the strategic cultivation of uncertainty and ignorance. It is not just trying to trim the fat from its statistical agencies, which were already underfunded before President Trump took office. Nor is it simply trying to spin the available data to its political advantage. Instead, it is turning away from the government’s responsibilities as a steward of information by minimizing, cherry-picking, misusing and sometimes even destroying data.

The idea that government ought to make decisions using evidence and hard data is a cornerstone of our political order...

A government based on deliberate indifference to information and data is a dangerous one. By turning away from evidence when it doesn’t suit, the administration is showing that it doesn’t think it matters whether it has the better argument, so long as it has the power to rule as it desires." 

Thursday, August 14, 2025

Trump’s answer to numbers he doesn’t like: Change them or throw them away; The Washington Post, August 14, 2025

, The Washington Post; Trump’s answer to numbers he doesn’t like: Change them or throw them away

"President Donald Trump presented inaccurate crime statistics to justify a federal takeover of D.C. police. He announced plans for the census to stop counting undocumented immigrants. And he ordered the firing of the official in charge of compiling basic statistics about the U.S. economy after a weak jobs report.

This month marked an escalation in Trump’s war on data, as he repeatedly tries to undermine statistics that threaten his agenda and distorts figures to bolster his policies. The latest instances come on top of actions the administration has taken across federal health, climate and education agencies to erase or overhaul data collection to align with the administration’s agenda and worldview.

The president’s manipulation of government data threatens to erode public trust in facts that leaders of both parties have long relied on to guide policy decisions. A breakdown in official government statistics could also create economic instability, restrain lifesaving health care and limit forecasts of natural disasters. Trump has routinely spread misinformation since the start of his political career, but his efforts in his second term to bend data to support his agenda have invited comparisons to information control in autocratic countries."

Monday, July 31, 2023

The Research Scandal at Stanford Is More Common Than You Think; The New York Times, July 30, 2023

 Theo Baker, The New York Times; The Research Scandal at Stanford Is More Common Than You Think

"To address research misconduct, it must first be brought into the light and examined in the open. The underlying reasons scientists might feel tempted to cheat must be thoroughly understood. Journals, scientists, academic institutions and the reporters who write about them have been too slow to open these difficult conversations.

Seeking the truth is a shared obligation. It is incumbent on all those involved in the scientific method to focus more vigorously on challenging and reproducing findings and ensuring that substantiated allegations of data manipulation are not ignored or forgotten — whether you’re a part-time research assistant or the president of an elite university. In a cultural moment when science needs all the credibility it can muster, ensuring scientific integrity and earning public trust should be the highest priority.

Theo Baker is a rising sophomore at Stanford University. He is the son of Peter Baker, the chief White House correspondent for The Times."

Thursday, September 27, 2018

Cornell Food Researcher's Downfall Raises Larger Questions For Science; NPR, September 26, 2018

Brett Dahlberg, NPR; Cornell Food Researcher's Downfall Raises Larger Questions For Science

"The fall of a prominent food and marketing researcher may be a cautionary tale for scientists who are tempted to manipulate data and chase headlines.

Brian Wansink, the head of the Food and Brand Lab at Cornell University, announced last week that he would retire from the university at the end of the academic year. Less than 48 hours earlier, JAMA, a journal published by the American Medical Association, had retracted six of Wansink's studies, after Cornell told the journal's editors that Wansink had not kept the original data and the university could not vouch for the validity of his studies."

Wednesday, January 6, 2016

Takata Emails Show Brash Exchanges About Data Tampering; New York Times, 1/4/16

Danielle Ivory and Hiroko Tabuchi, New York Times; Takata Emails Show Brash Exchanges About Data Tampering:
"When Honda Motor Company said two months ago that it would no longer use Takata as supplier of its airbags, the automaker said that testing data on the airbags had been “misrepresented and manipulated.”
Now, newly obtained internal emails suggest the manipulation was both bold and broad, involving open exchanges among Takata employees in Japan and the United States.
“Happy Manipulating!!!” a Takata airbag engineer, Bob Schubert, wrote in one email dated July 6, 2006, in a reference to results of airbag tests. In another, he wrote of changing the colors or lines in a graphic “to divert attention” from the test results and “to try to dress it up.”
The emails were among documents unsealed recently as part of a personal injury lawsuit against Takata and obtained by The New York Times...
Honda would not comment on whether the emails were examples of Takata misrepresentations. The automaker said that it had reached its conclusions after reviewing millions of internal Takata documents. But four airbag experts asked by The Times to review the emails said that they suggested an effort to misrepresent testing data.
“To have these kinds of offhand remarks shows that this is a systemic issue at Takata,” said Mark Lillie, a former Takata engineer and whistle-blower."