robertfrederick.co
Science š§Ŗ Journalism Reporter / Editor / Producer / Podcaster / Videographer / Manager. Teach journalism+podcasting online for Harvard. Nieman Fellow & AAAS Mass Media Fellow. Formerly in math. Occasionally edits math textbooks https://robertfrederick.co
103 posts
435 followers
191 following
Getting Started
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Seems like itās time for federal employees to flood the President and Attorney Generalās offices with requests for interpretation.
Ask for replies in writing from the President and/or the Attorney General by this executive order (screenshot of relevant part).
www.whitehouse.gov/presidential...
comment in response to
post
Seems like itās time for federal employees to flood the President and Attorney Generalās offices with requests for interpretation.
Ask for replies in writing from the President and/or the Attorney General by this executive order (screenshot of relevant part).
www.whitehouse.gov/presidential...
comment in response to
post
What a coincidence -- just finished Chapter 1.
"Self-love, which is the root of all sin, takes two social forms. One of them is the domination of other life by the self. The second is the sin of isolationism."
comment in response to
post
No. Congress has the power of the purse, not the President.
Frustrated by how they allocate it? Who isnāt?
But they ā not he ā should be allocating it.
comment in response to
post
Same for this article ā itās with my taxes that I pay for the FAA, NIH, NPS, USAID, etc.
āCutting costsā by eliminating programs and firing employees is not āsavings.ā
www.politico.com/news/2025/02...
comment in response to
post
Let's change words: America needs working-class "journalists."
āThe press became āthe mediaā because the word had a manipulative, Madison Avenue, all-encompassing connotation, and the press hated it.ā
-- William Safire, 1975
Quoted also by Michael Schudson, 2019
www.cjr.org/special_repo...
comment in response to
post
Let's change words: America needs working-class "journalists."
āThe press became āthe mediaā because the word had a manipulative, Madison Avenue, all-encompassing connotation, and the press hated it.ā
-- William Safire, 1975
Quoted also by Michael Schudson, 2019
www.cjr.org/special_repo...
comment in response to
post
Thank you -- I appreciate your saying so.
I don't know why other journalists chose not to include those caveats -- and ask more questions to clarify them.
But again, it seems we're still having today the same got-to-get-your-attention-no-matter-what problems. It's also a journalism problem.
comment in response to
post
Yes, and I pushed back on those statements, seeking clarification, which is why you also heard each speaker mention several caveats.
Iām sorry you found the caveats āunderwhelming.ā
Few caveats are exciting.
Thatās why I wrote that op-ed, to convince journalists to do the work to include them.
comment in response to
post
Thanks for your reply/citation. Rosen "convinced"? No. He lists many things that need to be done to be convinced.
But I'm concerned with the "got-to-get-your-attention-no-matter-what problems," which includes reporting on science that doesn't deserve attention.
niemanreports.org/why-every-sc...
comment in response to
post
Interesting -- thanks for your reporting.
I did Science's podcast then:
podcasts.aaas.org/science_podc...
As you'll hear, both Dr. Wolfe-Simon and an outside researcher included plenty of caveats.
It seems our world still has the same got-to-get-your-attention-no-matter-what problems.
comment in response to
post
I did Science's podcast then:
podcasts.aaas.org/science_podc...
As you'll hear, Dr. Wolfe-Simon -- and the independent researcher I also interviewed -- included plenty of caveats about her research.
It seems we're still having today the same got-to-get-your-attention-no-matter-what problems.
comment in response to
post
And whose job is that -- where's the funding to pay for that use of your time? Of anyone's time?
As @timothysnyder.bsky.social gives in "On Tyranny":
Do not obey in advance.
comment in response to
post
Oh no ā you got the one where heās lecturing about the role of the Senate ā š
Sounds like more AI to me.
comment in response to
post
Similar concerns here.
So frustrating.
comment in response to
post
Thanks for sharing.
A bit more carefully worded, but still looks like AI-generated stuff to my eye.
And given what Iāve seen Budd do, heās not doing his job in vetting any of these nominees ā at least not in any meaningful way.
comment in response to
post
Yet another beneficiary to rampant (and regularly deemed illegal) gerrymandering.
It's so frustrating to see the state being so "purple" (e.g., regularly electing Democrats for governor, Attorney General, etc.) and yet our federal and state legislators so "red."
comment in response to
post
Did he also write that RFK, Jr. being the right person to implement Trump's priorities? š±
comment in response to
post
Glad you spoke up!
So frustrating, isn't it, to see all these Republican legislators -- whose job is to create laws -- willing to let a President sidestep the law?
Did you see? A federal judge just blocked most everyone from most access to Treasury recs: www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/u...
comment in response to
post
Thanks for helping to try to hold them accountable for their decisions!
comment in response to
post
I donāt get it ā NC keeps electing Democrats as governor and Republicans for Senate. The House is wildly gerrymandered by the gerrymandered-Republican legislature (and found to be regularly illegally so).
But the Senate is a state-wide vote. Its odd.
comment in response to
post
Frustrating. Especially given his recent vote for Bondi, the election denierā¦.
comment in response to
post
Ugh!. I think I could better understand an automatic response over thisā¦ arriving so late! ā°
But I hear you. I hope you eventually get more than the automatic reply!
comment in response to
post
Geez ā doesnāt get much worse ā¦except in trying to un-do the Constitution by Executive Order, ignoring the 1974 Impoundment Act, ignoring Congressās bipartisan TikTok banā¦.
There are so many things our representatives arenāt representing, including the laws they passed.
Letās keep up the efforts!
comment in response to
post
Oh my! š±
comment in response to
post
And so frustrating.
Please keep tryingā¦ and together weāll all keep his voicemail full.
comment in response to
post
Please do!
And please add that this SecDef refused to answer in his confirmation hearings whether heād carry out an illegal order.
Itās literally in his job description:
ā(d) Unless specifically prohibited by lawā¦ā
uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?r...
comment in response to
post
Very much so.
Particularly because this SecDef refused to answer in his confirmation hearings whether heād carry out an illegal order.
Itās literally in his job description:
ā(d) Unless specifically prohibited by lawā¦ā
uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?r...
comment in response to
post
Your version is so much more succinct.
Concerning: this SecDef refused to answer in his confirmation hearings whether heād carry out an illegal order.
Itās literally in his job description:
ā(d) Unless specifically prohibited by lawā¦ā
uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?r...
comment in response to
post
I donāt know about that.
But I do see a major Project2025 author ā Vought ā who says heās ready to legally challenge the 1974 Impoundment Control Act if he becomes OMB Director.
ncnewsline.com/2025/02/05/d...
comment in response to
post
Agree ā a joke ā but one that fell flat.
comment in response to
post
And this SecDef refused to answer in his confirmation hearings whether heād carry out an illegal order.
Itās literally in his job description:
ā(d) Unless specifically prohibited by lawā¦ā
uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?r...
comment in response to
post
I imagine āform letterā is right and a lot of people got the same thing.
comment in response to
post
Coming from a military family (thanks grandfathers, father, and brother), Iād say yes.
They never celebrate it.
But this SecDef refused to answer whether heād carry out an illegal order.
Itās in his job description:
ā(d) Unless specifically prohibited by lawā¦ā
uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?r...
comment in response to
post
Glad it gave you a lol! š
comment in response to
post
Canāt comment on his cut-outed-ness, but his words strike me as cut-and-paste.
comment in response to
post
Ugh. So sorry. The same response every time? Wow.
comment in response to
post
I hear you. I went to high school in Tulsa when Inhofe was our representative in the House. The OK delegation didnāt listen then, either.
comment in response to
post
Thank you!
I do too, but feel the need to do something more.
comment in response to
post
I think some rhetorical analysis might show an AI chatbot at work.
comment in response to
post
Ugh.
I suspect Grok is at work.
comment in response to
post
Thatās got to be the AI of choice, I imagine.
comment in response to
post
I love the word anodyne.
But I donāt like anodyne rhetoric.
comment in response to
post
Left messages and notes about every one of these concerning nominations.
This SecDef refused to answer in his confirmation hearings whether heād carry out an illegal order.
Itās literally in his job description:
ā(d) Unless specifically prohibited by lawā¦ā
uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?r...
comment in response to
post
Frustrating, isnāt it?!