Panels giving scientific advice to Census Bureau disbanded by Trump administration

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Jeffrey Mervis: “…U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick has disbanded five outside panels that provide scientific and community advice to the U.S. Census Bureau and other federal statistical agencies just as preparations are ramping up for the country’s next decennial census, in 2030.

The dozens of demographers, statisticians, and public members on the five panels received nearly identical letters this week telling them that “the Secretary of Commerce has determined that the purposes for which the [committee] was established have been fulfilled, and the committee has been terminated effective February 28, 2025. Thank you for your service.”

Statistician Robert Santos, who last month resigned as Census Bureau director 3 years into his 5-year term, says he’s “terribly disappointed but not surprised” by the move, noting how a recent directive by President Donald Trump on gender identity has disrupted data collection for a host of federal surveys…(More)”.

Government data is disappearing before our eyes

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Anna Massoglia: “A battle is being waged in the quiet corners of government websites and data repositories. Essential public records are disappearing and, with them, Americans’ ability to hold those in power accountable.

Take the Department of Government Efficiency, Elon Musk’s federal cost-cutting initiative. Touted as “maximally transparent,” DOGE is supposed to make government spending more efficient. But when journalists and researchers exposed major errors — from double-counting contracts to conflating caps with actual spending — DOGE didn’t fix the mistakes. Instead, it made them harder to detect.

Many Americans hoped DOGE’s work would be a step toward cutting costs and restoring trust in government. But trust must be earned. If our leaders truly want to restore faith in our institutions, they must ensure that facts remain available to everyone, not just when convenient.

Since Jan. 20, public records across the federal government have been erased. Economic indicators that guide investments, scientific datasets that drive medical breakthroughs, federal health guidelines and historical archives that inform policy decisions have all been put on the chopping block. Some missing datasets have been restored but are incomplete or have unexplained changes, rendering them unreliable.

Both Republican and Democratic administrations have played a role in limiting public access to government records. But the scale and speed of the Trump administration’s data manipulation — combined with buyouts, resignations and other restructuring across federal agencies — signal a new phase in the war on public information. This is not just about deleting files, it’s about controlling what the public sees, shaping the narrative and limiting accountability.

The Trump administration is accelerating this trend with revisions to official records. Unelected advisors are overseeing a sweeping reorganization of federal data, granting entities like DOGE unprecedented access to taxpayer records with little oversight. This is not just a bureaucratic reshuffle — it is a fundamental reshaping of the public record.

The consequences of data manipulation extend far beyond politics. When those in power control the flow of information, they can dictate collective truth. Governments that manipulate information are not just rewriting statistics — they are rewriting history.

From authoritarian regimes that have erased dissent to leaders who have fabricated economic numbers to maintain their grip on power, the dangers of suppressing and distorting data are well-documented.

Misleading or inconsistent data can be just as dangerous as opacity. When hard facts are replaced with political spin, conspiracy theories take root and misinformation fills the void.

The fact that data suppression and manipulation has occurred before does not lessen the danger, but underscores the urgency of taking proactive measures to safeguard transparency. A missing statistic today can become a missing historical fact tomorrow. Over time, that can reshape our reality…(More)”.

Can small language models revitalize Indigenous languages?

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Brooke Tanner and Cameron F. Kerry: “Indigenous languages play a critical role in preserving cultural identity and transmitting unique worldviews, traditions, and knowledge, but at least 40% of the world’s 6,700 languages are currently endangered. The United Nations declared 2022-2032 as the International Decade of Indigenous Languages to draw attention to this threat, in hopes of supporting the revitalization of these languages and preservation of access to linguistic resources.  

Building on the advantages of SLMs, several initiatives have successfully adapted these models specifically for Indigenous languages. Such Indigenous language models (ILMs) represent a subset of SLMs that are designed, trained, and fine-tuned with input from the communities they serve. 

Case studies and applications 

  • Meta released No Language Left Behind (NLLB-200), a 54 billion–parameter open-source machine translation model that supports 200 languages as part of Meta’s universal speech translator project. The model includes support for languages with limited translation resources. While the model’s breadth of languages included is novel, NLLB-200 can struggle to capture the intricacies of local context for low-resource languages and often relies on machine-translated sentence pairs across the internet due to the scarcity of digitized monolingual data. 
  • Lelapa AI’s InkubaLM-0.4B is an SLM with applications for low-resource African languages. Trained on 1.9 billion tokens across languages including isiZulu, Yoruba, Swahili, and isiXhosa, InkubaLM-0.4B (with 400 million parameters) builds on Meta’s LLaMA 2 architecture, providing a smaller model than the original LLaMA 2 pretrained model with 7 billion parameters. 
  • IBM Research Brazil and the University of São Paulo have collaborated on projects aimed at preserving Brazilian Indigenous languages such as Guarani Mbya and Nheengatu. These initiatives emphasize co-creation with Indigenous communities and address concerns about cultural exposure and language ownership. Initial efforts included electronic dictionaries, word prediction, and basic translation tools. Notably, when a prototype writing assistant for Guarani Mbya raised concerns about exposing their language and culture online, project leaders paused further development pending community consensus.  
  • Researchers have fine-tuned pre-trained models for Nheengatu using linguistic educational sources and translations of the Bible, with plans to incorporate community-guided spellcheck tools. Since the translations relying on data from the Bible, primarily translated by colonial priests, often sounded archaic and could reflect cultural abuse and violence, they were classified as potentially “toxic” data that would not be used in any deployed system without explicit Indigenous community agreement…(More)”.

These Words Are Disappearing in the New Trump Administration

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Karen Yourish et al: “As President Trump seeks to purge the federal government of “woke” initiatives, agencies have flagged hundreds of words to limit or avoid, according to a compilation of government documents.

The above terms appeared in government memos, in official and unofficial agency guidance and in other documents viewed by The New York Times. Some ordered the removal of these words from public-facing websites, or ordered the elimination of other materials (including school curricula) in which they might be included.

In other cases, federal agency managers advised caution in the terms’ usage without instituting an outright ban. Additionally, the presence of some terms was used to automatically flag for review some grant proposals and contracts that could conflict with Mr. Trump’s executive orders.

The list is most likely incomplete. More agency memos may exist than those seen by New York Times reporters, and some directives are vague or suggest what language might be impermissible without flatly stating it.

All presidential administrations change the language used in official communications to reflect their own policies. It is within their prerogative, as are amendments to or the removal of web pages, which The Times has found has already happened thousands of times in this administration…(More)”

How to Win a War Against Reality

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Review by Abby Smith Rumsey: “How does a democracy work if its citizens do not have a shared sense of reality? Not very well. A country whose people cannot agree on where they stand now will not agree on where they are going. This is where Americans find themselves in 2025, and they did not arrive at this juncture yesterday. The deep divisions that exist have grown over the decades, dating at least to the end of the Cold War in 1991, and are now metastasizing at an alarming rate. These divisions have many causes, from climate change to COVID-19, unchecked migration to growing wealth inequality, and other factors. People who live with chronic division and uncertainty are vulnerable. It may not take much to get them to sign on to a politics of certainty…

Take the United States. By this fractured logic, Make America Great Again (MAGA) means that America once was great, is no longer, but can be restored to its prelapsarian state, when whites sat firmly at the top of the ethnic hierarchy that constitutes the United States. Jason Stanley, a professor of philosophy and self-identified liberal, is deeply troubled that many liberal democracies across the globe are morphing into illiberal democracies before our very eyes. In “Erasing History: How Fascists Rewrite the Past to Control the Future,” he argues that all authoritarian regimes know the value of a unified, if largely mythologized, view of past, present, and future. He wrote his book to warn us that we in the United States are on the cusp of becoming an authoritarian nation or, in Stanley’s account, fascist. By explaining “the mechanisms by which democracy is attacked, the ways myths and lies are used to justify actions such as wars, and scapegoating of groups, we can defend against these attacks, and even reverse the tide.”…

The fabrication of the past is also the subject of Steve Benen’s book “Ministry of Truth. Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.” Benen, a producer on the Rachel Maddow Show, keeps his eye tightly focused on the past decade, still fresh in the minds of readers. His account tracks closely how the Republican Party conducted “a war on the recent past.” He attempts an anatomy of a very unsettling phenomenon: the success of a gaslighting campaign Trump and his supporters perpetrated against the American public and even against fellow Republicans who are not MAGA enough for Trump…(More)”

A US-run system alerts the world to famines. It’s gone dark after Trump slashed foreign aid

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Lauren Kent: “A vital, US-run monitoring system focused on spotting food crises before they turn into famines has gone dark after the Trump administration slashed foreign aid.

The Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET) monitors drought, crop production, food prices and other indicators in order to forecast food insecurity in more than 30 countries…Now, its work to prevent hunger in Sudan, South Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, Ethiopia, Afghanistan and many other nations has been stopped amid the Trump administration’s effort to dismantle the US Agency for International Development (USAID).

“These are the most acutely food insecure countries around the globe,” said Tanya Boudreau, the former manager of the project.

Amid the aid freeze, FEWS NET has no funding to pay staff in Washington or those working on the ground. The website is down. And its treasure trove of data that underpinned global analysis on food security – used by researchers around the world – has been pulled offline.

FEWS NET is considered the gold-standard in the sector, and it publishes more frequent updates than other global monitoring efforts. Those frequent reports and projections are key, experts say, because food crises evolve over time, meaning early interventions save lives and save money…The team at the University of Colorado Boulder has built a model to forecast water demand in Kenya, which feeds some data into the FEWS NET project but also relies on FEWS NET data provided by other research teams.

The data is layered and complex. And scientists say pulling the data hosted by the US disrupts other research and famine-prevention work conducted by universities and governments across the globe.

“It compromises our models, and our ability to be able to provide accurate forecasts of ground water use,” Denis Muthike, a Kenyan scientist and assistant research professor at UC Boulder, told CNN, adding: “You cannot talk about food security without water security as well.”

“Imagine that that data is available to regions like Africa and has been utilized for years and years – decades – to help inform divisions that mitigate catastrophic impacts from weather and climate events, and you’re taking that away from the region,” Muthike said. He cautioned that it would take many years to build another monitoring service that could reach the same level…(More)”.

Extending the CARE Principles: managing data for vulnerable communities in wartime and humanitarian crises

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Essay by Yana Suchikova & Serhii Nazarovets: “The CARE Principles (Collective Benefit, Authority to Control, Responsibility, Ethics) were developed to ensure ethical stewardship of Indigenous data. However, their adaptability makes them an ideal framework for managing data related to vulnerable populations affected by armed conflicts. This essay explores the application of CARE principles to wartime contexts, with a particular focus on internally displaced persons (IDPs) and civilians living under occupation. These groups face significant risks of data misuse, ranging from privacy violations to targeted repression. By adapting CARE, data governance can prioritize safety, dignity, and empowerment while ensuring that data serves the collective welfare of affected communities. Drawing on examples from Indigenous data governance, open science initiatives, and wartime humanitarian challenges, this essay argues for extending CARE principles beyond their original scope. Such an adaptation highlights CARE’s potential as a universal standard for addressing the ethical complexities of data management in humanitarian crises and conflict-affected environments…(More)”.

Data, waves and wind to be counted in the economy

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Robert Cuffe: “Wind and waves are set to be included in calculations of the size of countries’ economies for the first time, as part of changes approved at the United Nations.

Assets like oilfields were already factored in under the rules – last updated in 2008.

This update aims to capture areas that have grown since then, such as the cost of using up natural resources and the value of data.

The changes come into force in 2030, and could mean an increase in estimates of the size of the UK economy making promises to spend a fixed share of the economy on defence or aid more expensive.

The economic value of wind and waves can be estimated from the price of all the energy that can be generated from the turbines in a country.

The update also treats data as an asset in its own right on top of the assets that house it like servers and cables.

Governments use a common rule book for measuring the size of their economies and how they grow over time.

These changes to the rule book are “tweaks, rather than a rewrite”, according to Prof Diane Coyle of the University of Cambridge.

Ben Zaranko of the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) calls it an “accounting” change, rather than a real change. He explains: “We’d be no better off in a material sense, and tax revenues would be no higher.”

But it could make economies look bigger, creating a possible future spending headache for the UK government…(More)”.

Elon Musk Also Has a Problem with Wikipedia

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Margaret Talbot: “If you have spent time on Wikipedia—and especially if you’ve delved at all into the online encyclopedia’s inner workings—you will know that it is, in almost every aspect, the inverse of Trumpism. That’s not a statement about its politics. The thousands of volunteer editors who write, edit, and fact-check the site manage to adhere remarkably well, over all, to one of its core values: the neutral point of view. Like many of Wikipedia’s s principles and procedures, the neutral point of view is the subject of a practical but sophisticated epistemological essay posted on Wikipedia. Among other things, the essay explains, N.P.O.V. means not stating opinions as facts, and also, just as important, not stating facts as opinions. (So, for example, the third sentence of the entry titled “Climate change” states, with no equivocation, that “the current rise in global temperatures is driven by human activities, especially fossil fuel burning since the Industrial Revolution.”)…So maybe it should come as no surprise that Elon Musk has lately taken time from his busy schedule of dismantling the federal government, along with many of its sources of reliable information, to attack Wikipedia. On January 21st, after the site updated its page on Musk to include a reference to the much-debated stiff-armed salute he made at a Trump inaugural event, he posted on X that “since legacy media propaganda is considered a ‘valid’ source by Wikipedia, it naturally simply becomes an extension of legacy media propaganda!” He urged people not to donate to the site: “Defund Wikipedia until balance is restored!” It’s worth taking a look at how the incident is described on Musk’s page, quite far down, and judging for yourself. What I see is a paragraph that first describes the physical gesture (“Musk thumped his right hand over his heart, fingers spread wide, and then extended his right arm out, emphatically, at an upward angle, palm down and fingers together”), goes on to say that “some” viewed it as a Nazi or a Roman salute, then quotes Musk disparaging those claims as “politicized,” while noting that he did not explicitly deny them. (There is also now a separate Wikipedia article, “Elon Musk salute controversy,” that goes into detail about the full range of reactions.)

This is not the first time Musk has gone after the site. In December, he posted on X, “Stop donating to Wokepedia.” And that wasn’t even his first bad Wikipedia pun. “I will give them a billion dollars if they change their name to Dickipedia,” he wrote, in an October, 2023, post. It seemed to be an ego thing at first. Musk objected to being described on his page as an “early investor” in Tesla, rather than as a founder, which is how he prefers to be identified, and seemed frustrated that he couldn’t just buy the site. But lately Musk’s beef has merged with a general conviction on the right that Wikipedia—which, like all encyclopedias, is a tertiary source that relies on original reporting and research done by other media and scholars—is biased against conservatives.

The Heritage Foundation, the think tank behind the Project 2025 policy blueprint, has plans to unmask Wikipedia editors who maintain their privacy using pseudonyms (these usernames are displayed in the article history but don’t necessarily make it easy to identify the people behind them) and whose contributions on Israel it deems antisemitic…(More)”.

To Stop Tariffs, Trump Demands Opioid Data That Doesn’t Yet Exist

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Josh Katz and Margot Sanger-Katz: “One month ago, President Trump agreed to delay tariffs on Canada and Mexico after the two countries agreed to help stem the flow of fentanyl into the United States. On Tuesday, the Trump administration imposed the tariffs anyway, saying that the countries had failed to do enough — and claiming that tariffs would be lifted only when drug deaths fall.

But the administration has seemingly established an impossible standard. Real-time, national data on fentanyl overdose deaths does not exist, so there is no way to know whether Canada and Mexico were able to “adequately address the situation” since February, as the White House demanded.

“We need to see material reduction in autopsied deaths from opioids,” said Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary, in an interview on CNBC on Tuesday, indicating that such a decline would be a precondition to lowering tariffs. “But you’ve seen it — it has not been a statistically relevant reduction of deaths in America.”

In a way, Mr. Lutnick is correct that there is no evidence that overdose deaths have fallen in the last month — since there is no such national data yet. His stated goal to measure deaths again in early April will face similar challenges.

But data through September shows that fentanyl deaths had already been falling at a statistically significant rate for months, causing overall drug deaths to drop at a pace unlike any seen in more than 50 years of recorded drug overdose mortality data.

The declines can be seen in provisional data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which compiles death records from states, which in turn collect data from medical examiners and coroners in cities and towns. Final national data generally takes more than a year to produce. But, as the drug overdose crisis has become a major public health emergency in recent years, the C.D.C. has been publishing monthly data, with some holes, at around a four-month lag…(More)”.