Reporting in a time of widespread fear

“That’s not a topic I’m comfortable talking about.” “Please remove me from your story; intelligent people will be able to identify me.” “I can’t afford to stick my neck out.”

As I report on how current events affect science, more people than ever before are refusing to talk with me or are requesting anonymity. There have always been cases where people needed to stay out of the public eye—for example, a physicist supported by soft money and complaining about their institution, a tenure-track researcher critical of some university policy, or someone who was denied tenure and didn’t want their name out there.

But since Donald Trump regained the White House in January 2025 and started attacking diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, firing federal workers, canceling grants, cutting budgets, implementing tariffs, and generally shaking things up, researchers are more mum than I’ve ever experienced in my three decades of interviewing people.

Scientists have hesitated to comment on student and faculty recruitment, international travel and collaborations, freezes on awarding tenure or hiring, conference attendance —anything that could be affected by Trump’s rhetoric and new US policies. For the most part, academics want to avoid drawing attention to themselves or their institutions. Money could be withheld. Visas could be revoked. Fear permeates. And, given the billions of dollars withheld from Harvard University and other institutions, their caution may be well-placed.

Even straight white male scientists with tenure and others in seemingly safe positions request anonymity. A Nobel Prize recipient declined to talk with me and stopped answering emails. Less surprising is that agency spokespeople have become even harder to reach.

Luckily, some people will still speak on the record, and many people will speak off the record. They feel strongly about what’s going on, and often they believe their position offers them some protection. Maybe they feel safe because they are retired or they work for a major company. Maybe they’re in another country—although even then, researchers are sometimes careful about commenting on how US policies affect them or their country’s science enterprise. That caution is exacerbated by the State Department’s announcement in June that scholars and students who apply for visas will be screened for “hostility” toward the US. International researchers want to protect their collaborations with US-based scientists. And they don’t want to be hassled the next time they try to come into the country.

Over and over, US researchers describe their dismay that the Trump administration’s actions are ruining the country’s academic research enterprise—long considered the best in the world and a strong economic driver. Scientists outside the country say the same thing and emphasize that decimating science in the US will slow scientific progress globally.

The widespread fear makes reporting harder. It also makes it more important than ever.