Post

Mark Histed
@markhisted.org

Excellent. Yes. The asymmetrical media environment helps explain the destruction that happened in science this year. Thanks to @michaelhobbes.bsky.social and @volts.wtf for highlighting our tendency to ignore the info environment. I wrote about that from 🧪 earlier this week. 1/

David Roberts@volts.wtf

Today on Volts: I'm joined by the great @michaelhobbes.bsky.social to discuss "reactionary centrism," an intellectual tendency that's come to dominate US public life. You know the type: would never view themselves as conservative, yet finds voluntary pronoun use vastly more aggravating than fascism.

volts.wtfAll about "reactionary centrism"Michael Hobbes joins me to diagnose the pundit class's obsession with scolding the left while the right burns down the house.

12 reposts28 likes

Mark Histed
@markhisted.org

Tom saying that scientists should not get involved in politics was an initial inspiration for my piece and I’ll follow up with more on that this week.

Mark Histed
@markhisted.org

High-profile platforms on billionaire-owned news networks. Fox and WSJ Opinion, along with other rightwing sources — the Epoch Times, DC Examiner, Reason, Unherd, NY Post, etc — attacked science and elevated the anti-science merchants of doubt that are now tearing down science and universities.

Laura Helmuth@laurahelmuth.bsky.social

"Junk scientists, from Scott Atlas to Jay Bhattacharta, were given high-profile platforms on billionaire-owned news networks, and given awards from billionaire-funded thinktanks. It was primarily billionaires, acting through merchants of doubt they boosted, that “politicized” science and NIH." (2/3)

Mark Histed
@markhisted.org

And moreover, centrist sources play a role too. NYT Mag’s long piece by a former EPPC (rightwing religious thinktank) person who founded an anti-science mag out of EPPC is a good example. Ed Yong did amazing work at the Atlantic but was frustrated by the reactionary centrist contrarians there.

Mark Histed
@markhisted.org

And it’s important for us to talk about the reasons why our asymmetrical media environment turned against biomedical science. Who could be opposed to cancer research, right? But it was politically useful for the right to sow division about science.

Laura Helmuth@laurahelmuth.bsky.social

"Despite loud voices on the right claiming that scientists have politicized science, the opposite is true. ... As with climate change and asbestos, powerful and wealthy interests found biomedical science, during COVID, opposed to their partisan agenda" (1/3) donmoynihan.substack.com/p/american-b...

donmoynihan.substack.comAmerican biomedical science in 2026Where we are, how we got here, and what to do next
Mark Histed
@markhisted.org

This part. Let’s think as we go forward about how to fix our asymmetrical media environment. Because the broken info env a big part of how we got here — from Trump, to Minneapolis and brownshirts, to the destruction of cancer cures and science.

Stephen T. Slota@steveslota.bsky.social

This episode of Volts is so. SO. good. Thank you @volts.wtf @michaelhobbes.bsky.social for yelling into the void about something that's been driving me absolutely insane for years, particularly the bit about reactionary centrists conveniently ignoring the influence of asymmetrical media ecosystems.