Maryam Zaringhalam
@webmz.bsky.social
#openscience in service of society. Senior Director of Policy @cos.io and Senior Producer @storycollider.bsky.social . Previously: NLM/NIH, White House OSTP.
Views are my own. she/her.
Views are my own. she/her.
There's obviously A LOT going on in the EO, but I'm struck by how clearly it articulates a double standard. While applicants must adhere to GSS, political officials are given authority to disregard their own standard of peer review — one of course valued by researchers and the broader public.
August 8, 2025 at 5:33 PM
There's obviously A LOT going on in the EO, but I'm struck by how clearly it articulates a double standard. While applicants must adhere to GSS, political officials are given authority to disregard their own standard of peer review — one of course valued by researchers and the broader public.
The EO goes on: "Nothing in this order shall be construed to discourage or prevent the use of peer review... provided... recommendations remain advisory and are not ministerially ratified, routinely deferred to, or otherwise treated as de facto binding."
How does that uphold peer review?
How does that uphold peer review?
August 8, 2025 at 5:33 PM
The EO goes on: "Nothing in this order shall be construed to discourage or prevent the use of peer review... provided... recommendations remain advisory and are not ministerially ratified, routinely deferred to, or otherwise treated as de facto binding."
How does that uphold peer review?
How does that uphold peer review?
Sec 3 layers political control into funding decisions, designating a political appointee to develop a process. Agencies already have long-standing processes for grantmaking, drawing on expertise of program officers and peer reviewers. Allowing a political to override these runs counter to GSS.
August 8, 2025 at 5:33 PM
Sec 3 layers political control into funding decisions, designating a political appointee to develop a process. Agencies already have long-standing processes for grantmaking, drawing on expertise of program officers and peer reviewers. Allowing a political to override these runs counter to GSS.
As an aside: there's a lot to be said about the Gold Standard Science EO. Do we legitimize the EO by adopting the phrase "Gold Standard" like it's an independent standard rather than a political tool? Does it matter when it's already out there? Regardless, this EO doesn't pass muster with GSS.
August 8, 2025 at 5:33 PM
As an aside: there's a lot to be said about the Gold Standard Science EO. Do we legitimize the EO by adopting the phrase "Gold Standard" like it's an independent standard rather than a political tool? Does it matter when it's already out there? Regardless, this EO doesn't pass muster with GSS.