<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font size="+2" face="Calibri"><i><b>February 6, 2023</b></i></font><font
face="Calibri"><br>
</font><br>
<i>[ Grist's grit news says Puerto Rico goes RICO ]</i><br>
<b>How the Supreme Court could finally force Big Oil to face trial</b><br>
Dozens of cities and states sued oil giants for deceiving the
public. The Supreme Court could soon break these cases out of limbo.<br>
Kate Yoder - Staff Writer<br>
Published Feb 03, 2023<br>
It’s been eight years since the world learned that “Exxon Knew.” The
oil giant had grasped the dangers of burning fossil fuels since
1977, investigations showed, despite its long-standing public stance
that the science was “uncertain” and persistent efforts to block
legislation that would control carbon pollution. The revelations
launched a wave of lawsuits that aimed to put fossil fuel companies
on trial for deceiving the public about climate change.<br>
<br>
In 2017, cities and counties in California started the trend by
suing dozens of oil, gas, and coal companies using state “tort” laws
meant to protect people from deceptive advertising. Attorneys
general in other states filed similar suits of their own, beginning
with Rhode Island in 2018. It spurred speculation that Big Oil might
face a reckoning for misleading the public about the dangers of
climate change, much as Big Tobacco did in the 1990s after decades
spent denying that smoking could cause cancer. <br>
<br>
In the ensuing years, not a single one of these consumer-protection
cases — now numbering nearly two dozen — made it to trial. They have
bounced around between federal and state courts, with oil companies
maneuvering to delay any action. “It says something about what the
industry thinks is the power of these cases, that it has kept these
up in procedural battles for over five years now,” said Karen Sokol,
a law professor at Loyola University in New Orleans...<br>
- -<br>
Some other routes to legal action have already been tried and
abandoned, such as New York state’s lawsuit that accused ExxonMobil
of misleading shareholders about climate change. In 2019, a judge
ruled that the New York state attorney general had failed to provide
enough evidence that Exxon broke the law. Since then, Exxon has used
the ruling to support the idea that the lawsuits against them are
misguided. But the judge who ruled in Exxon’s favor made clear at
the time that the suit was “a securities fraud case, not a climate
change case<br>
And there’s at least one completely new approach that doesn’t depend
on the Supreme Court’s ruling. <br>
<br>
A first-of-its-kind lawsuit filed by 16 towns in Puerto Rico in
November accuses Chevron, ExxonMobil, Shell, and other fossil fuel
companies of colluding to conceal how their products contribute to
climate change. Their argument is that this collusion violated
antitrust laws and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt
Organizations Act, or RICO — a federal law passed in 1970 to take
down the Mafia.<br>
<br>
Racketeering cases relying on RICO have not only taken down mobsters
like John Gotti and the Gambino crime family, but have also been
successful against the Hell’s Angels biker gang, the Key West police
department in Florida, as well as opioid manufacturers and tobacco
companies. The Puerto Rico lawsuit seeks to make companies pay
billions of dollars for the extensive damages that towns suffered
during hurricanes Maria and Irma in 2017.<br>
<br>
Because the lawsuit was filed in federal court, it won’t be pulled
into the jurisdictional tug-of-war that has made other climate cases
drag on for years.<br>
<br>
“They’ve made it easy to prove,” said Melissa Sims, an attorney at
Milberg, the Tennessee-based law firm representing the Puerto Rican
cities, “because unlike all the other racketeering cases that have
been on file, none of them included a written battle plan with a
detailed division of labor on how they were going to accomplish
their deception.”<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://grist.org/accountability/supreme-court-state-climate-lawsuits-oil-exxon/">https://grist.org/accountability/supreme-court-state-climate-lawsuits-oil-exxon/</a><br>
<p>- -</p>
<i>[ See the thick legal language of Puerto Rico RICO: ]</i><br>
<b>Municipalities of Puerto Rico v. Exxon Mobil Corp.</b><br>
Filing Date: 2022<br>
Case Categories: Adaptation Actions seeking money damages for
losses <br>
Common Law Claims<br>
Principal Laws: Sherman Antitrust Act, Conspiracy, Failure to Warn,
State Law–Strict Liability, Common Law Consumer Fraud, Rule 7 of
Puerto Rico Rules Against Misleading Practices and Advertisements,
Puerto Rico Nuisance Statute (32 L.P.R.A. §2761), Strict
Liability—Design Defect, Negligent Design Defect, State Law—Unjust
Enrichment, Racketeer Influenced and Corruption Organizations Act
(RICO)<br>
Description: Lawsuit brought by municipalities in Puerto Rico
seeking to hold fossil fuel companies liable for losses resulting
from storms during the 2017 hurricane season and ongoing economic
losses since 2017.<br>
Municipalities of Puerto Rico v. Exxon Mobil Corp.<br>
Docket number(s): 3:22-cv-01550 Court/Admin Entity: D.P.R.<br>
<b>SUMMARY</b><br>
<blockquote>Puerto Rico Municipalities Filed Federal Suit Seeking
Climate Change Damages from Fossil Fuel Companies. Sixteen Puerto
Rico municipalities filed a lawsuit in the federal district court
for the District of Puerto Rico seeking to hold coal, oil, and gas
companies liable for losses resulting from storms during the 2017
hurricane season and ongoing economic losses since that time. The
municipalities brought the action on their own behalf as well as
on behalf of a proposed class of all of Puerto Rico’s
municipalities. The municipalities alleged that the defendants
were responsible for 40.01% of all global industrial greenhouse
gas emissions from 1965 to 2017, and that these collective
emissions were a “substantial factor in the increase in intensity
of the 2017 Atlantic Hurricane Season.” The municipalities alleged
that Puerto Rico “suffered apocalyptic damage” from two of those
storms—Hurricanes Irma and Maria—which they alleged were
intensified by climate change, “as accelerated by Defendants’
consumer products and conduct.” The plaintiffs contended that the
defendants were liable because “they knowingly caused and
contributed to the worsening of the climate change by producing,
promoting, refining, marketing, and selling fossil fuel products …
that have caused and continue to cause the devastating effects of
climate change, while concealing and misrepresenting the dangers
associated with the use of fossil fuel-based products, including
the increased frequency of more dangerous storms.” The complaint
alleged a “corporate worldwide strategy” to hide information
linking the defendants’ products to acceleration of climate change
and to an increased likelihood “that Puerto Rico and thus the
Plaintiff Municipalities would be ravaged by dangerous, deadly
storms.” In addition to more intense storms, the municipalities
alleged other physical climate change impacts, including coral
reef degradation and “an unprecedented, massive bloom of
sargassum,” as well as social, educational, and economic losses,
including increased immigration from the municipalities and
damages to the agricultural industry. The municipalities asked
that the defendants pay costs the plaintiffs had incurred and
would continue to incur due to climate change. They also sought
punitive damages, disgorgement of profits, pre-judgment interest,
attorneys’ and expert witness fees and other costs, and other
equitable, declaratory and/or injunctive relief “to assure … an
effective remedy.” They asserted 14 causes of action under federal
and Puerto Rico law: claims of common law consumer fraud and
conspiracy to commit common law consumer fraud and deceptive
business practices, claims under Puerto Rico’s statute prohibiting
false or misleading advertisements and practices, claims under the
federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO),
federal antitrust claims, claims under Puerto Rico’s nuisance
statute, strict liability claims based on failure to warn and
design defect, a negligent design defect claim, and a cause of
action for unjust enrichment/restitution.<br>
</blockquote>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://climatecasechart.com/case/municipalities-of-puerto-rico-v-exxon-mobil-corp/">http://climatecasechart.com/case/municipalities-of-puerto-rico-v-exxon-mobil-corp/</a>
<p><font face="Calibri"><i><br>
</i></font></p>
<p><font face="Calibri"><i><br>
</i></font></p>
<font face="Calibri"><i>[ Western water now rare -- it's either
deeply hidden, salty or up for sale ] </i></font><br>
<font face="Calibri"><b>Shrinking Colorado River hands Biden his
first climate brawl</b></font><br>
<font face="Calibri">California, Arizona and Nevada are among the
states at odds over how to divide the river's water — a fight
among powerful political and economic interests with dire
consequences.</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">By ANNIE SNIDER</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">02/04/2023</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">A fracas among the seven states along the
drought-stricken Colorado River is forcing the first major
reckoning for the Biden administration over who should bear the
pain of adapting to a changing climate.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">At issue is whether it’s fair to use
century-old rules, created during an era of relative abundance, to
ration water from the rapidly shriveling river now that the West
is on the precipice of climate disaster. With California and its
six neighbors locked in a dispute over two competing approaches to
divvying up the cuts in water deliveries, whatever the
administration decides will almost certainly end up in court.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">The dispute is an early glimpse of the type of
fights the U.S. will face as the warming climate supercharges
drought, wildfires, storms and floods, forcing wrenching choices
over which communities get protected. Those decisions pose a
political minefield — something President Joe Biden’s Interior
Department is learning from the fight over the West’s most
important river, which is creating existential risks for some of
the country’s most economically and politically powerful states
and industries.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">The current feud centers on California, a
longtime Democratic stronghold, and Arizona, a newfound swing
state that has proven crucial to the party’s control of the White
House and Senate.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">The 1,450-mile long Colorado River made much of
the West inhabitable, and now supplies water to 40 million
Americans from Wyoming to the border with Mexico, as well as an
enormously productive agricultural industry. But climate change
has shriveled its flows by 20 percent over the past two decades,
and for each additional degree of warming, scientists predict the
river will shrink another 9 percent.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">Water levels at the system’s two main
reservoirs are falling so fast, the Interior Department has said
that water users must cut consumption by as much as a third of the
river’s flows or risk a collapse that could cripple their ability
to deliver water out of those dams. That would also cut off
hydropower production that is crucial to the stability of the
Western grid...</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">- -</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">The state-level politics, alone, are a disaster
for a Democratic administration.</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">- -</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">And while the immediate fight is centered on
Arizona and California, the Upper Basin states of Wyoming,
Colorado, Utah and New Mexico, which backed Arizona’s approach,
have their own interest in moving toward a more flexible
interpretation of century-old water rules. Climate change is
expected to soon make it impossible for them to deliver the
legally required amount of water to the Lower Basin without
draconian cuts to their own cities and tribes — an even bigger
brawl that will have to be fought out in the next two years.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">But within each state, the fault lines aren’t
always clear. Since Western water law allows whoever claimed the
water first to be first in line, agricultural users often hold
some of the strongest rights, whereas cities and suburbs are
almost always the first to take cuts...</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">- -</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">Adding to the pressure on the Biden
administration is the fact that lawmakers on Capitol Hill are
increasingly jumping into the fray.</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">- -</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">The Biden administration won’t have to make any
tough decision on who wins and who loses just yet, though. First,
the Interior Department will need to publicly lay out exactly what
effect the competing approaches would mean to communities and
ecosystems across the West if the next few years turn out to be
dry ones...</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">- -</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">Some of the state negotiators think this
process of publicly detailing the exact risks and costs to
communities of the two competing concepts could help energize the
negotiations among the states.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">If the analysis of California’s proposal shows
the result would be “drying up the Central Arizona Project [and]
major metropolitan areas and taking all of the water away from
native American tribes, I think the choices will become really
stark,” said John Entsminger, Nevada’s top Colorado River
negotiator.</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">- -</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">“I definitely think there’s still a chance for
a seven-state agreement, and I think the modeling outputs that are
going to be public could be very helpful for helping drive some
form of compromise,” he said.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">Regardless of how the negotiations turn out and
what Interior decides, many legal experts expect the fight to
ultimately land in court...</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">- -</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">Even more concerning to federal, state and
local water managers is the risk that a court decision,
particularly from the conservative supermajority on the Supreme
Court, could end up curtailing the federal government’s broad
authorities to manage not just the Colorado River, but waterways
across the West. This would be occurring at a time when climate
change requires flexibility to adapt to hydrologic systems that
are evolving in unprecedented and unpredictable ways...</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">- - </font><br>
<font face="Calibri">“The court could impose real limits on its
ability to adapt existing laws to hydrologic and climatologic
realities,” Larson said. “That’s something that the Bureau of
Reclamation doesn’t want to do for practical reasons — climate
change is changing our hydrologic systems and we need to be able
to adapt it — and also for institutional reasons. No one likes to
give up power.”...</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.politico.com/news/2023/02/04/colorado-river-biden-climate-change-water-00080990">https://www.politico.com/news/2023/02/04/colorado-river-biden-climate-change-water-00080990</a></font><br>
<font face="Calibri"></font>
<p><font face="Calibri"><br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Calibri"><br>
</font></p>
<font face="Calibri"><i>[ the structure of system seems to be
revealed - text and audio ]</i></font><br>
<font face="Calibri"><b>Congrats Exxon: You’re Killing It (Our
Climate, That Is)</b></font><br>
<font face="Calibri">KLAUS MARRE </font><br>
<font face="Calibri">02/05/23</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://whowhatwhy.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/amazon_polly_74149.mp3?version=1675599074">https://whowhatwhy.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/amazon_polly_74149.mp3?version=1675599074</a></font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">On Tuesday, Exxon served a powerful reminder of
why we are in this predicament — and it takes neither artificial
intelligence nor a genius to connect the dots here: The oil giant
announced that it had posted a record profit of $56 billion in
2022. This means that, in the time it takes you to finish this
paragraph, Exxon will have made $50,000… from killing the
environment.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">To add insult to injury (at least if you think
that making the planet uninhabitable is bad), the one damper on
this excellent earnings report, at least in Exxon’s view, was that
the European Union imposed a windfall tax of $1.3 billion on the
company’s fourth quarter earnings.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">The oil giant thinks that such a tax is
“unlawful and bad policy.” We, on the other hand, believe that tax
should be much higher and that the executives whose greed is
killing the environment should be held to account.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">To drive home the point of why all of this is
really, really bad, another study published Wednesday said that
the problem isn’t a lack of technologies that could prevent global
warming but rather that we — both as countries and individuals —
just don’t care enough about this problem.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">Finally, on Thursday, Shell also announced that
it posted a record profit, of $40 billion. In the story on this
historic haul, the BBC included this nugget: “Despite the move,
Shell had said it did not expect to pay any UK tax this year as it
is allowed to offset decommissioning costs and investments in UK
projects against any UK profits.”</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">And that really sums up the problem. As a
society, we have made killing profitable. In this case, “we”
refers to the lawmakers who have been bought and paid for by the
dirty money of oil companies and other polluters, arms
manufacturers, and the tobacco industry (a study published in 2019
showed that the latter, as well as the coal industry, kills more
people annually than it employs). There are plenty of others, such
as social media companies, who are profiting from creating misery
while escaping any semblance of accountability.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">Together, they have ensured that making
products designed to kill people, destroy the environment, or
create divisiveness is good business.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">Perhaps the most obscene aspect of this week’s
news is that Exxon’s stock went down. Clearly, investors felt that
the company hadn’t harmed the environment enough. Maybe next time,
gents!</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">The one positive is that this corporate (and
personal) greed, combined with a total disregard for the common
good, can’t go on forever. Allowing so few to profit off the
suffering of so many is simply not sustainable.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">Unfortunately, neither is our environment. And,
as the studies show, the clock is not only ticking, it’s skipping
ahead. Chances are that we won’t fix these issues before millions
of people lose their homes and livelihoods because of climate
change.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">But at least the 1 percent will be a bit
richer.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">By the way, this isn’t a plea to abandon
capitalism per se. The innovations that a rewards-based economic
system can spark will be sorely needed in the future. It is only
fair that the people who can come up with solutions to seemingly
insurmountable problems should be rewarded… and then those rewards
should be taxed heavily.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">That’s a system that would work.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">What clearly isn’t working, however, is the
inhumane, cruel capitalism that is being practiced now. It rewards
those who have and not those who can. And it does so at the
expense of the only habitat we have.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">It seems inevitable that the many will demand
change at some point. Sadly, it seems just as inevitable that it
will be too late.</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://whowhatwhy.org/science/environment/congrats-exxon-youre-killing-it-our-climate-that-is/">https://whowhatwhy.org/science/environment/congrats-exxon-youre-killing-it-our-climate-that-is/</a></font><br>
<p><font face="Calibri"><br>
</font></p>
<p><i><font face="Calibri"><br>
</font></i> </p>
<i> </i><i><font face="Calibri"> [ caused by increased carbon
dioxide into the water - video ]</font></i><br>
<b>Climate change: what is ocean acidification?</b><br>
The Economist<br>
41,232 views Feb 2, 2023<br>
As carbon emissions change the chemistry of the seas, ocean
acidification threatens marine life and human livelihoods. How
worried should you be about climate change’s so-called “evil twin”?<br>
<blockquote>00:00 The other carbon problem<br>
00:50 How does the ocean’s deepest point reveal its past?<br>
02:55 Why are baby oysters dying? <br>
04:08 Is the ocean acidic?<br>
05:21 What is causing ocean acidification?<br>
06:01 Why are corals dissolving? / Will deep sea ecosystems
survive?<br>
08:35 A threat to human livelihoods<br>
10:42 What are the ‘potato chips of the sea’?<br>
12:04 What is the solution? <br>
</blockquote>
Sign up to our weekly science newsletter to keep up to date: <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://econ.st/3dMaWBt">https://econ.st/3dMaWBt</a>
<br>
How does Alaska’s nature reveal our past and future? <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://econ.st/3E0Jdrb">https://econ.st/3E0Jdrb</a>
<br>
Watch our film on how chemical pollution is suffocating the sea: <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://econ.st/3CgQVwd">https://econ.st/3CgQVwd</a>
<br>
What can marine volcanic vents reveal about ocean acidification? <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://econ.st/3xYP7W5">https://econ.st/3xYP7W5</a>
<br>
Why are oysters getting smaller? <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://econ.st/3ChRk1k">https://econ.st/3ChRk1k</a> <br>
Watch our film to understand how carbon enters the ocean: <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://econ.st/3DXNkUT">https://econ.st/3DXNkUT</a>
<br>
Can the ocean solve climate change? <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://econ.st/3SvswIy">https://econ.st/3SvswIy</a><br>
<font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVWZyDz--30">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVWZyDz--30</a></font><br>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
<font face="Calibri"><i>[ Harvard Crimson reports from the
Information battlegrounds ]</i></font><br>
<font face="Calibri"><b>Harvard Misinformation Expert Joan Donovan
Forced to Leave by Kennedy School Dean, Sources Say</b></font><br>
<font face="Calibri">Harvard Kennedy School Dean Douglas W.
Elmendorf is forcing out online misinformation expert Joan M.
Donovan from her role at the Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics
and Public Policy and ending her research project, according to
three HKS staff members with knowledge of the situation.</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">MILES J. HERSZENHORN</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">February 2, 2023</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">Harvard Kennedy School Dean Douglas W.
Elmendorf is forcing out online misinformation expert Joan M.
Donovan from her role at the Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics
and Public Policy and ending her research project, according to
three HKS staff members with knowledge of the situation.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">Donovan was told she has until summer 2024 to
end the Technology and Social Change project and depart from her
role at HKS, according to the staff members. Donovan, who is not a
tenure-track professor, has led the project since its inception in
2019 and serves as the Shorenstein Center’s research director.
Donovan has also taught at HKS as an adjunct lecturer in public
policy.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">In addition, Donovan was told her prominence at
the school led Elmendorf to end her time at the Shorenstein
Center, two HKS staff members said.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">HKS spokesperson James F. Smith confirmed in an
emailed statement that the project is ending.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">“The Technology and Social Change project is
winding down — through an extended transition — because it does
not have intellectual and academic leadership by a full HKS
faculty member, as required of all long-term research and outreach
projects at HKS,” Smith wrote.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">As part of the School’s decision to end the
Technology and Social Change project, Donovan is not allowed to
raise new funding, according to the three HKS staff members. The
project is also facing a hiring freeze and spending constraints on
existing funding, the staff members said.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">Donovan declined to comment on her status at
HKS and the termination of her project.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">Donovan received her Ph.D. in sociology and
science studies from the University of California San Diego in
2015, before joining the Data and Society Research Institute in
2016, where she served as research lead on a team studying media
manipulation.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">In 2019, Donovan joined the Shorenstein Center
to serve as the director and lead researcher of the Technology and
Social Change project.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">At Harvard, Donovan was a leading force in
bringing the study of misinformation and disinformation to
prominence in academia. Donovan has testified in front of House
and Senate subcommittees on the spread of misinformation online.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">Tensions between Elmendorf and Donovan rose in
fall 2021, according to three HKS staff members, around when
Donovan started to work on HKS’ Facebook archive project,
fbarchive.org. The archive will provide researchers and
journalists with access to photos of documents obtained by Frances
B. Haugen, the 2021 Facebook whistleblower who disclosed internal
Facebook research on its technologies’ negative effects.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">A year later, at the start of the fall 2022
semester, Donovan was informed that the Technology and Social
Change project would ultimately end in summer 2024.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">In mid-September 2022, HKS professor Latanya A.
Sweeney joined Donovan as co-principal investigator for the
Technology and Social Change project, the first time Donovan was
not its sole head.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">Donovan taught the HKS course Democracy,
Politics and Institutions 622: “Media Manipulation and
Disinformation Campaigns” and co-authored a widely-read study in
July 2022 that found a plurality of participants in the Jan. 6
attack on the Capitol were motivated by their support for Trump.
In September 2022, Donovan published a book titled “Meme Wars: The
Untold Story of the Online Battles Upending Democracy in America”
about the online spread of right-wing media political conspiracy
theories.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">Smith, an HKS spokesperson, wrote in the
statement that the school is continuing to promote scholarship in
the field of misinformation and disinformation.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">“Harvard Kennedy School is committed to the
teaching and study of misinformation and disinformation, and
several faculty members are leading significant projects that
address these topics,” he wrote.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">In a Thursday morning email obtained by The
Crimson, Shorenstein Center Director Nancy R. Gibbs wrote to
center affiliates that the decision to shut down the Technology
and Social Change project was “solely driven” by HKS policy of
only allowing full professors to lead research projects.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">“While there can be limited exceptions, those
can't continue indefinitely without a faculty member as the
principal project leader and academic head,” Gibbs wrote in the
email.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">Donovan declined to comment on the contents of
the letter.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">The Technology and Social Change project —
which lists a team of more than 25 people on its website including
staff, fellows, contributing researchers, and research assistants
— has been led by Donovan since 2019.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">Gibbs sent the email hours after The Crimson
first reported that HKS would end the Technology and Social Change
project by summer 2024.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">Gibbs wrote that other initiatives led by
faculty members related to the study of misinformation and
disinformation would continue at the Shorenstein Center, including
the Facebook archive project and the Misinformation Review, an
online academic journal.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">In recent weeks, Elmendorf has been the subject
of controversy.</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri">He faced backlash in January over his rejection
of a fellowship for former Human Rights Watch head Kenneth Roth.
Elmendorf, who allegedly blocked Roth over anti-Israel criticism,
reversed his decision after more than 1,000 Harvard affiliates
signed an open letter calling for his resignation.</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">—Staff writer Miles J. Herszenhorn can be
reached at <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:miles.herszenhorn@thecrimson.com">miles.herszenhorn@thecrimson.com</a>. Follow him on Twitter
@MHerszenhorn.</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/2/2/donovan-forced-leave-hks/">https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/2/2/donovan-forced-leave-hks/</a></font><br>
<font face="Calibri"></font>
<p><font face="Calibri">- -<br>
</font></p>
<font face="Calibri"><i>[ Boston Globe report ]</i><br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><b>Harvard winding down misinformation
expert Joan Donovan’s research over school policy</b><br>
By Anissa Gardizy Globe Staff, February 3, 2023, <br>
</font><font face="Calibri">The Harvard Kennedy School plans to wind
down a research project led by prominent misinformation expert
Joan Donovan, who is the research director of the Shorenstein
Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy.<br>
<br>
Started in 2019, the Technology and Social Change Project studies
how media manipulation impacts public conversation, democracy, and
society. News of the project winding down, which was first
reported by The Harvard Crimson on Thursday, sparked backlash from
researchers and journalists on social media.<br>
<br>
The work must end because of a school policy, which requires all
research projects be led by full faculty members, said Nancy
Gibbs, director of the Shorenstein Center, in an e-mail obtained
by the Globe.<br>
</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">“While there can be limited exceptions, those
can’t continue indefinitely,” she wrote in a note to staff
Thursday. “The decision to wind the TaSC project down is solely
driven by that policy, which has been followed across the school
for many years.”</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">In a separate e-mail sent to Shorenstein Center
advisory board members on Friday, Gibbs addressed the widespread
attention the situation has garnered.<br>
</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">“This just reminded me that people outside of
academia (including me before I came here) often don’t know the
details about how the place works or how research is organized and
supervised,” she wrote.<br>
<br>
Donovan declined to comment for this story.<br>
<br>
Gibbs said in the e-mail to staff that Harvard Kennedy School dean
Doug Elmendorf told Donovan last summer that the Technology and
Social Change Project would need to wind down by June 2024, since
research at the school must be led by a faculty member. The
project is fully funded until then, but Elmendorf said Donovan
could not expand with new funding, staff, or large new
initiatives.<br>
<br>
During her time at Harvard, Donovan has become one of the most
high-profile researchers on online extremism, media manipulation,
and disinformation campaigns. She is regularly quoted by media
outlets, has testified before Congress, and recently published
“Meme Wars,” a book she coauthored with two other members of the
Technology and Social Change Project.</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">Though Harvard says its decision stems from a
school policy, it has prompted some people in academic and media
circles to speak out about the importance of Donovan’s work. Laura
Edelson, a postdoctoral researcher in computer science at New York
University, said what was done to Donovan is “frightening.”<br>
<br>
“We’re in a race to study how and why social media is so
vulnerable to misinformation so we can make these systems safer,”
Edelson wrote on Twitter. “We need her research, and we need her.”<br>
</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">Taylor Lorenz, a tech columnist at the
Washington Post, tweeted that “This is absolutely horrible news,
this team was doing essential work demystifying the way bad actors
manipulate the internet.”<br>
</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">Gibbs wrote in her e-mail that other work on
misinformation at the school will continue, such as at The Harvard
Kennedy School Misinformation Review and the Public Interest Tech
Lab, which are run by full faculty members.<br>
<br>
Donovan received a PhD in sociology and science studies from the
University of California San Diego in 2015. Donovan led research
on media manipulation and platform accountability at the Data and
Society Research Institute in New York before coming to the
Shorenstein Center in 2018.<br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/02/03/business/harvard-winding-down-misinformation-expert-joan-donovans-research-over-school-policy/">https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/02/03/business/harvard-winding-down-misinformation-expert-joan-donovans-research-over-school-policy/</a><br>
</font>
<p><font face="Calibri">- - <br>
</font></p>
<font face="Calibri">[ Other sources like the Harvard Crimson ]<br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><b>This is absolutely horrible news,
this team was doing essential work demystifying the way bad
actors manipulate the internet</b><br>
thecrimson.com<br>
Harvard Misinformation Expert Joan Donovan Forced to Leave by
Kennedy School Dean, Sources Say | News | The Harvard <br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://twitter.com/TaylorLorenz/status/1621182937042677760">https://twitter.com/TaylorLorenz/status/1621182937042677760</a><br>
</font>
<p><font face="Calibri"><br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Calibri"><br>
</font></p>
<font face="Calibri">[ some light humor, brief video - cute & we
need a shopping guide for information ]<br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><b>A recipe for trustworthy information</b><br>
The Conversation<br>
Dec 19, 2022<br>
How the magic is made at The Conversation: we take the research of
experts, add expert editing and cook up trustworthy journalism.<br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbK91C53g2c">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbK91C53g2c</a><br>
</font>
<p><font face="Calibri"><br>
</font> </p>
<font face="Calibri"> <br>
<i>[The news archive - looking back]</i><br>
<font size="+2"><i><b>February 6, 2005</b></i></font> <br>
February 6, 2005: Chris Mooney points out the numerous falsehoods
in the recently released Michael Crichton novel "State of Fear."<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2005/02/06/checking_crichtons_footnotes">http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2005/02/06/checking_crichtons_footnotes</a>
<br>
</font><font face="Calibri"> </font>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><font face="Calibri">======================================= <br>
</font> <font face="Calibri"><b class="moz-txt-star"><span
class="moz-txt-tag">*Mass media is lacking, many </span>daily
summaries<span class="moz-txt-tag"> deliver global warming
news - a few are email delivered*</span></b> <br>
</font> <font face="Calibri"><br>
=========================================================<br>
</font> <font face="Calibri"><b>*Inside Climate News</b><br>
Newsletters<br>
We deliver climate news to your inbox like nobody else. Every
day or once a week, our original stories and digest of the web’s
top headlines deliver the full story, for free.<br>
</font> <font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://insideclimatenews.org/">https://insideclimatenews.org/</a><br>
--------------------------------------- <br>
*<b>Climate Nexus</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://climatenexus.org/hot-news/*">https://climatenexus.org/hot-news/*</a>
<br>
Delivered straight to your inbox every morning, Hot News
summarizes the most important climate and energy news of the
day, delivering an unmatched aggregation of timely, relevant
reporting. It also provides original reporting and commentary on
climate denial and pro-polluter activity that would otherwise
remain largely unexposed. 5 weekday <br>
================================= <br>
</font> <font face="Calibri"><b class="moz-txt-star"><span
class="moz-txt-tag">*</span>Carbon Brief Daily </b><span
class="moz-txt-star"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/newsletter-sign-up">https://www.carbonbrief.org/newsletter-sign-up</a></span><b
class="moz-txt-star"><span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span></b> <br>
Every weekday morning, in time for your morning coffee, Carbon
Brief sends out a free email known as the “Daily Briefing” to
thousands of subscribers around the world. The email is a digest
of the past 24 hours of media coverage related to climate change
and energy, as well as our pick of the key studies published in
the peer-reviewed journals. <br>
more at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.getrevue.co/publisher/carbon-brief">https://www.getrevue.co/publisher/carbon-brief</a>
<br>
================================== <br>
*T<b>he Daily Climate </b>Subscribe <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://ehsciences.activehosted.com/f/61*">https://ehsciences.activehosted.com/f/61*</a>
<br>
Get The Daily Climate in your inbox - FREE! Top news on climate
impacts, solutions, politics, drivers. Delivered week days.
Better than coffee. <br>
Other newsletters at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.dailyclimate.org/originals/">https://www.dailyclimate.org/originals/</a>
<br>
<br>
</font> </p>
<font face="Calibri">
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/
<br>
/Archive of Daily Global Warming News <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/">https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/</a><br>
<br>
<br>
/To receive daily mailings - click to Subscribe <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:subscribe@theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request"><mailto:subscribe@theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request></a>
to news digest./<br>
<br>
Privacy and Security:*This mailing is text-only. It does not
carry images or attachments which may originate from remote
servers. A text-only message can provide greater privacy to the
receiver and sender. This is a personal hobby production curated
by Richard Pauli<br>
By regulation, the .VOTE top-level domain cannot be used for
commercial purposes. Messages have no tracking software.<br>
To subscribe, email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated
moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote">contact@theclimate.vote</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote"><mailto:contact@theclimate.vote></a>
with subject subscribe, To Unsubscribe, subject: unsubscribe<br>
Also you may subscribe/unsubscribe at <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote">https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote</a><br>
Links and headlines assembled and curated by Richard Pauli for <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://TheClimate.Vote">http://TheClimate.Vote</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://TheClimate.Vote/"><http://TheClimate.Vote/></a>
delivering succinct information for citizens and responsible
governments of all levels. List membership is confidential and
records are scrupulously restricted to this mailing list. <br>
</font>
</body>
</html>