Censorship Undermines Federal Research Funding

Introduction

In early May 2025, the National Science Foundation (NSF) abruptly terminated multiple lines of research in direct response to Executive Order 14035 and the newly issued Executive Order 14168. These orders prohibit federal support for studies on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), women and gender variation in STEM, transgender populations—and even transgenic mice. A subsequent wave of cancellations targeted crucial work on misinformation and disinformation, dismissed by some political leaders as “neo-Marxist class warfare.” What began as a budgetary reprioritization has morphed into outright censorship of entire scientific domains.

Scope of Cancellations

The NSF’s Science of Science (SoS) program, which I served for three years as a program officer, funded peer-reviewed projects in science communication, civic engagement, and misinformation dynamics. Among the canceled grants:

• Computational social science of information spread
  Researchers applied graph convolutional networks (GCNs) and stochastic epidemic models to quantify how false narratives propagate on platforms like Twitter and TikTok. Their work combined GPU-accelerated network simulations with large-scale text mining pipelines.
• Incentive structures for online deception
  A multidisciplinary team in computer science, sociology, and behavioral economics designed agent-based models to study how micro-payments, token rewards, and ‘‘like’’ mechanisms encourage users to share manipulated content.
• Role of influencers in vaccine communication
  This mixed-methods study integrated social network analysis, A/B testing of messaging, and real-time sentiment tracking through natural language processing (NLP) to devise strategies ensuring accurate public health information reaches high-risk demographics.

Their cancellation prevents the development of algorithmic tools to detect misinformation, hinders best practices for public advisories, and stalls improvements in early-warning systems for emergencies.

The NSF Mechanism and Peer Review Integrity

The NSF functions primarily as a “pass-through agency.” Its $9 billion annual budget disburses roughly:

• 80% for competitive research grants across physics, engineering, geosciences, biology, social sciences, and more;
• 13% for STEM education and workforce development;
• 5% for internal administrative operations, including peer-review coordination.

Each proposal undergoes a merit review via the FastLane system: two independent external reviews, panel discussions by domain experts, and program officer recommendations. Unilateral cancellation of funded awards subverts this rigorous process, replacing scientific merit with political litmus tests.

Technical Implications for AI and Data Science Research

Misinformation research underpins advances in machine learning (ML) and data analytics. For instance, training robust transformer-based language models (e.g., fine-tuned BERT or GPT variants) requires accurately labeled datasets of true vs. false claims. Projects cut by the NSF were building open corpora from cross-platform streams—data essential to mitigate bias, improve fact-checking algorithms, and refine real-time detection systems deployed on cloud infrastructures with auto-scaling GPU clusters.

Without federal support, private firms may fill the vacuum but with proprietary models, limited transparency, and potential conflicts of interest—jeopardizing reproducibility, peer validation, and open-source collaboration.

Expert Insights: Consequences for Global Innovation

Dr. Jane Williams, Vice President of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), warns: “These cancellations erode the public trust that underlies every facet of innovation—from CRISPR gene editing to Doppler radar forecasting. When we silence evidence-based research, we weaken our ability to respond to pandemics, climate events, and digital threats.”

In a joint letter released on May 7, 2025, the American Physical Society and the National Academy of Sciences called on Congress to safeguard merit-based peer review and restore funding for censored domains.

Recommendations for Policy and Community Action

To defend the integrity of public-funded science, stakeholders can:

• Advocate for the Science for the Future Act in the Senate Appropriations Committee, which proposes restoring $2 billion to the NSF.
• Engage with professional societies (e.g., Union of Concerned Scientists, AAAS) to lobby elected representatives.
• Support open science platforms—deposit data and code in repositories like GitHub, Zenodo, and OSF to ensure continuity beyond government funding.
• Educate the public through outreach: town halls, library seminars, and social media live sessions demonstrating the impact of federally funded research on daily life.
• Encourage federal employees and scientists to participate in policy discussions and congressional testimonies outlining the real-world costs of censorship.

Conclusion

The recent wave of grant cancellations marks a departure from the NSF’s long-standing principle of merit-based funding. It substitutes political priorities for scientific expertise, undercutting the very foundation of U.S. leadership in R&D. From AI-driven misinformation detection to critical public-health studies, the future of open inquiry is at stake. It is imperative that scientists, policymakers, and citizens unite to restore trust, funding, and autonomy to America’s scientific enterprise.