Scientific American is not scientific and not American By Ethel C. Fenig
For over 175 years the magazine Scientific American has bragged that it covers
the advances in research and discovery that are changing our understanding of the world and shaping our lives. (snip) Authoritative, engaging features, news, opinion and multimedia stories from journalists and expert authors — including more than 200 Nobel Prize winners — provide need-to-know coverage, insights and illumination of the most important developments at the intersection of science and society.
However, around six years ago the American segment of the publication changed as it was purchased by a private German-British conglomerate, Springer Nature, which has affiliates and publications worldwide. And international controversies to go along with its international nature such as highly credible accusations of succumbing to demands for censorship from Communist China against research from scientists in Tibet and independent Taiwan.
Not very scientific.
Further veering from science, the magazine entered the political realm for the first time in the November, 2020 election, endorsing Joe Biden for president because well, he is so scientific. Or something. And Donald J. Trump is not. Or something.
Slightly over a year and a half later, Scientific American’s descent into hate filled politics unsuccessfully disguised as science is total; its 175-year-old reputation as a reliable scientific publication totally trashed, with barely hope for recovery. A few weeks ago they published a lying screed “Health Care Workers Call for Support of Palestinians” which contained lying propaganda, altered photographs and no facts. The authors qualify as “scientists” worthy of publication in Scientific [sic] ]American [sic!] because they “are health care workers (HCWs) and faculty from around the world.”
The snarky, weaseley justification the editors offered for its appearance:
Scientific American publishes opinion and analysis articles from a variety of viewpoints. As is the case with all opinion articles, the views expressed here do not necessarily represent those of Scientific American.
…is as full of lies and self delusion as the lying document itself because its appearance in the publication, does “represent those of Scientific American” no matter the editors’ huffing and puffing to the contrary, just as clearly as their previous endorsement of Biden and earlier kowtowing to the Chinese Communists “represents those of Scientific American.”
For those genuine scientists and science lovers who are puzzled by the recent degrading politicization of their once interesting magazine and want facts on the situation rather than Hamas terrorist propaganda, the venerable and factual Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis (CAMERA), as usual, provides them.
In the meantime, 175 years of trustworthy information on science in America from Scientific America is over; their takeover by Scientific American Arabic (scroll down to the bottom of their title page to see their new addition) is complete. Star Trek is more accurate.
You have been warned.
Comments are closed.
