Jacob Romanow

@jakeromanow.bsky.social

ars longa, vita brevis https://liberalarts.utexas.edu/english/faculty/jr75399

The State AGs were on pace to kill the Paramount/Warner Bros by litigation and delay until Gavin Newsom stepped in and turned the tide. Now the Trump loyalist Ellisons will control CNN and HBO. Don't ever, ever forget that Newsom stabbed us in the back www.wsj.com/business/med...

Exclusive | Newsom Expresses Concerns About State Antitrust Suit Against Paramount

The California governor has told people involved in the suit that blocking the $81 billion deal could harm Hollywood jobs.

wsj.com

Everyone knows you shouldn't represent yourself in court; humanists defending the humanities is bad for the humanities and bad for the defense of the humanities and that is why they want us to do it (not to say we never should—but we should get real about why we're being asked).

Great thread altogether, but this is the point I keep returning to over the last four years. The rest of us are in many ways along for the ride of the tech sector attempting to enforce labor discipline on a highly trained workforce w a tool that potentially is increasing their leverage.

Soren Spicknall@sorenspicknall.bsky.social · 2w ago

Then it dissipated. Public perception of shiny tech companies shifted as scandals broke, movies got made, and unions busted. A glut of new coders on the market combined with the pandemic and the end "free money" to de-elite-ify tech work. Even privileged tech workers experienced labor discipline.

Fun fact: in our polling of battleground states, about 60% of voters said it is a “top” or “high” priority for Congress to investigate and hold Musk accountable. Lean into it Dems. He’s a cartoon villain - treat him like one.

Kevin M. Kruse@kevinmkruse.bsky.social · 3w ago

Musk is already underwater in polls and if Democrats lean in they can make him even more toxic. He's declared open war on you all and is pushing a toxic, destructive, racist agenda. Maybe it's time to push back? I don't know, I'm just spitballing here.

The hype machine loves asking about how tech alters our understanding of self (and of course it does, as ever) but chronically avoids asking how tech alters our understanding of (human) others—that is instructive

People don’t want to hear diseases just happen. It scares them to death. They need it to be because of malign actors or because they didn’t take the right thing. The fact that it could happen to anyone, anytime, just because is terrifying because you can’t control it. Whether autism/covid it’s fear.

It's like a parody, but it's deadly serious; the Commerce Department (which includes Census, NOAA, and others) has outright deleted "don't alter or suppress scientific findings for political reasons" from its scientific integrity rules. Seriously.

Protecting against "inappropriate influence" is no longer a "hallmark" of scientific integrity

The Commerce Department updated its policy for promoting a "culture of scientific integrity" in January 2025, days before Trump's second inauguration.

A new Trump administration order bans the Census Bureau and the Bureau of Economic Analysis from using statistical “noise,” or data for fuzzing survey results, to protect people’s privacy in their statistics.

The 2025 version included bans on attempts to shape or interfere in data collection, statistical analysis and other scientific activities "against well-accepted scientific methods and theories or without scientific justification."

The department's policy, the 2025 version said, involves ensuring scientific findings at its agencies "are not suppressed, delayed, or altered for political purposes and are not subjected to inappropriate influence," as well as making sure there's "independent review of facilities, methodologies, and other scientific activities as appropriate to ensure scientific integrity."

That language is missing, however, in the Trump administration's revision of the policy, according to an NPR analysis of text posted on the Commerce Department's website.

And while the revision adopts a definition for "scientific integrity" that is similar to the previous version, it no longer says that "protection from inappropriate influence" is among the "hallmarks of scientific integrity."
Hansi Lo Wang (he/him)@hansilowang.bsky.social · 4w ago

SCOOP: After the Census Bureau issued a highly unusual report tied to a President Trump-aligned think tank, the bureau’s parent agency, the Commerce Department, cut language banning political interference from its scientific integrity policy, @npr.org has learned www.npr.org/2026/08/31/n...

Actually, NO reading "counts." Counts for what? For whom? Are we competing to get a pizza party? Do you count how many times a year you go swimming or drink a cup of coffee? Thinking and feeling are not side hustles

I wrote about this a few years ago for New Chaucer Studies: Pedagogy and Profession, particularly the paradox of the increasing demand for specialization on the job market vs the generalist reality most of us teach within: escholarship.org/uc/item/7gn2...

escholarship.org

Sheila Liming@seeshespeak.bsky.social · 2mo ago

It’s syllabus prep season, and I’m thinking about what a privilege and benefit it must be for those academics who get to directly tie their teaching / syllabi to their research / writing. 1/5