Launching Reckoning Science

We, Naomi Oreskes and Sasha Kaurov, are here to launch Reckoning Science.

We hope to create a space for an in-depth, no-holds-barred discussion of science. In the current moment, many people are defending an ideal of science that is not necessarily consistent with the state of science today. We believe in science—the beauty of its achievements and its human stories—but we also think we need to be honest about the messiness and its real and consequential entanglements with politics, money, and power.

This publication is for readers who do science, care about science, or rely on science—in other words, everyone. That includes scientists, educators, journalists, policymakers, and well-informed (or not-so-well-informed) members of the public who want to better understand or assess the state of science in today's society.

Political, funding, and technological changes are pushing science in novel ways. To withstand their impacts on its credibility and reliability, we believe we must double down on science’s core commitments: a straight scientific record and sober, responsible scientists who are aware of these challenges and not afraid to tell the truth about weaknesses in the state of science today. We want to defend science, to be sure, and in these pages we will. But we will also be honest about corporate corruption, the problems of celebrity science, and other difficulties we face in the present moment.

This is not a replacement for academic journals and established media. Those venues remain essential for large-scale investigations and formal review, and we continue to publish our academic work in (and believe in) peer-reviewed journals. Nor is it a replacement for formal op-ed and commentary pieces that we will continue to write. Rather, this is a place for a kind of public conversation that we think the future of science requires. Above all, more than a few friends and colleagues have asked us to do this! It feels like time.

Why Existing Venues Are Not Enough

Traditional media operates under increasing structural and overt commercial constraints. Ownership is concentrated; editorial priorities are shaped by commercial pressure, political vulnerability, and the demands of shortening news cycles. Even when coverage is careful, important questions often fall outside what is timely or easily framed. Real science develops slowly. Understanding it takes time.

Independent and social media have filled some of these gaps. They move quickly and often reach wide audiences. Yet they rarely support the depth, continuity, and methodological care that serious discussion of science requires. Incentives favor speed, certainty, and often confrontation and outrage. And, while lies travel faster than truth in general, they do so particularly quickly on social media.

Academic publishing also faces problems. Skewed incentives have given rise to giant publishers that turn a blind eye to mediocre or even fraudulent research. This damages the reputation of academic publishing and peer review as a whole and leaves the public confused about whom to trust.

We think these conditions leave room for a specific kind of work: careful, evidence-based analysis that is public-facing, iterative, and institutionally independent.

Reckoning Science will try to occupy that space.

What We Will Publish

Reckoning Science is a project by Naomi Oreskes and Alexander "Sasha" Kaurov. (Read more on our About page.)

We will write across all branches of science—what the Germans call Wissenschaft—that is, knowledge production. This means the natural sciences, the social sciences, and the humanities. The issues we face today do not respect disciplinary boundaries; neither should serious analysis of them.

We are committed to making all published work freely available.

This project is also an experiment in whether this line of work can be self-sustaining. Therefore, we offer paid subscriptions as a way to support our efforts. All proceeds will go toward further developing the projects we write about and their associated research. We will also issue transparency reports on an annual basis.

And we will not conduct animal experiments (although we may report on them).

We plan several recurring formats:

Essays

Attempts in the original sense of the word. Sometimes speculative on purpose to test interpretations and examine claims circulating in public debate.

Sketches

Research in progress. These are analyses, datasets, historical findings, or empirical observations that may graduate toward formal journal articles. They will be rigorous, but open to revision.

Outside Contributions

We will certainly cover the most relevant research done by others and invite external commentary when appropriate.

A reckoning is never done alone. Reckoning Science depends on attentive readers who are willing to scrutinize, challenge, and hold us accountable. If you want to be part of that process, we invite you to sign up.