[A recent study surveyed 350 scientists about social media
commentary: 2 out of 3 reported harassment related to comments made
about the COVID-19 pandemic, 1 in 5 reported doxxing. It’s out of
control.]
[[link removed]]

HARASSMENT AGAINST SCIENTISTS IS OUT OF CONTROL  
[[link removed]]


 

Katelyn Jetelina
June 27, 2023
Your Local Epdemiologist
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ A recent study surveyed 350 scientists about social media
commentary: 2 out of 3 reported harassment related to comments made
about the COVID-19 pandemic, 1 in 5 reported doxxing. It’s out of
control. _

March for Science | April 22, 2017, NYC, photo by nyorca

 

Last week Peter Hotez experienced pile-ons, stalking, and bullying
after events
[[link removed]] unfolded
on Twitter. So much so that law enforcement
[[link removed]] got
involved. A complete nightmare.

He’s not alone. These nightmares are now a common occurrence for
scientists and physicians in public health. Both online and offline.
For vaccines. For gun violence. For reproductive health. And
apparently for wildfires now, too.

It’s gotten out of control, which becomes an individual risk as well
as a risk to the communities we serve.

Hotez’s experience is not uncommon

Many scientists and physicians have similar stories. Harassed at
coffee shops. Death threats, doxxing (private information had been
shared), hacking, and getting sued. Hand-written letters in the mail.
Emails pointing gun barrels at them. Heads added to fake pornographic
pictures. Heckled after leaving work. Needing full-time security
details. Moving states to escape threats.

[[link removed]]

I have experienced almost all of these in three short years. Others
have too. We don’t just hear each others stories; we see it in the
numbers, too. A recent study
[[link removed]] surveyed
350 scientists about social media commentary:

*
2 out of 3 scientists reported harassment related to comments made
about the COVID-19 pandemic

*
1 in 5 reported doxxing

Another study in _Nature_ asked scientists what types of harassment
they experienced. Fifteen percent reported death threats.

[[link removed]]

While these surveys do have a potential for bias—those who
experience harassment are more likely to fill out a survey—different
data angles show a consistent story:

*
Before the pandemic, harassment against scientists wasn’t nearly
as high
[[link removed]]

*
Compared to the general public
[[link removed]],
the rate of harassment against scientists is higher

*
Scientists posting public health messages on social media were more
likely
[[link removed]] to
receive online harassment than those who don’t

*
Of course, harassment isn’t new 
[[link removed]]to other
scientists, like climate experts

Women scientists are particularly at risk

Watching gender differences unfold has been particularly jarring,
particularly as a woman scientist. Women experience harassment
differently:

*
1 in 3
[[link removed]] report
being sexually harassed online, more than their male counterparts

*
Targeted for harassment _because_ they are female

*
Women report more
[[link removed]] emotional
stress related to the threats than men

This is a huge problem

Scientific communication, combatting misinformation, and bringing
scientific dialogue to social media is dependent on volunteers.
Because of this, too often scientists assume the consequences alone.
This takes a significant personal toll.

After a while, this risk is just not worth it. Scientists reach a
tipping point—whether it be a health event, a threat becoming too
real, or just exhaustion. When they stop interacting, the gap between
science and community only grows wider allowing misinformation and
disinformation to fill the void. This takes a toll on communities.

The tipping point has already been reached for many. _Axios_, for
example, reported
[[link removed]] that
scientists are leaving Twitter in droves. In another survey,
scientists who reported higher frequencies of trolling or personal
attacks were _most likely_ to say that their experiences had greatly
affected their willingness to speak about science in the future in
media interviews.

[[link removed]]

Public health is inherently political. And, it’s “public,”
meaning it requires buy-in from the public. It _needs_ to be a
bi-directional conversation with the public. Rapid, widely accessible
scientific dialogue was a life saver during the pandemic: scientists
talking to each other, to the community, to media. Scientists
listening to the community. We need this in the future, especially if
we don’t fix root causes
[[link removed]] of
mis- and disinformation. A conversation can include disagreement, but
this means civilized conversations rather than pile-ons and
ridiculousness.

Bottom line

We need scientists to speak more than ever. We need communities to
join the scientific conversation. At the same time, we need threats to
be clearly and unanimously rejected. Denounced by our communities, but
also denounced by institutions through action. If not, more and more
will wonder: _is the juice worth the squeeze?_

Love, YLE

_“Your Local Epidemiologist (YLE)” is written by Dr. Katelyn
Jetelina, MPH PhD—an epidemiologist, wife, and mom of two little
girls. During the day she is a senior scientific consultant to a
number of organizations. At night she writes this newsletter. Her main
goal is to “translate” the ever-evolving public health world so
that people will be well equipped to make evidence-based decisions.
This newsletter is free thanks to the generous support of fellow YLE
community members. To support this effort, subscribe
[[link removed]]._

* Science
[[link removed]]
* anti-science
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]

Manage subscription
[[link removed]]

Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]