Summary
- Laura Helmut, editor-in-chief of Science American magazine, is leaving the publication.
- Shortly after the election, he posted several offensive comments on social media about the results.
- It was unclear whether Helmut’s writings or the reaction to them played a role in his departure.
Laura Helmut, editor-in-chief of Scientific America, is leaving the publication less than two weeks after she shared several offensive posts about the presidential election results on the social media app Bluesky.
Helmut, “I have decided to leave Scientific American after 4.5 years as Editor-in-Chief” wrote on Thursday at BlueSky. “I’m going to take some time to think about what’s next (and watch the birds)…”
It was unclear if Helmut’s social media posts or the reaction to them played a role in his departure. Helmut declined an interview request and said he could not comment.
Scientific American did not directly respond to questions about Helmut’s departure, but its president, Kimberly Lau, said in a statement: “Laura Helmut has decided to step down as editor-in-chief of Scientific American. We thank Laura for leading Scientific American for four years, during which the magazine won major awards for science communications and saw the creation of a redesigned digital newsroom. We wish him success in his future life.”
After a series of Bluesky posts following the Nov. 5 election, Helmut became a target of some conservative commentators. Posts from his profile have been deleted, but screenshots have been widely shared.
In the posts, Helmut apologized to young voters and complained that it was full of “royal fascists” of Generation X.
Helmut wrote: “Solidarity to everyone celebrating early results as the meanest, dumbest, most bigoted high school classmates threw them to the moon and back.”
a next Bluesky post, on November 7thHelmut apologized and said he had deleted the posts on election night, calling it “offensive and inappropriate.”
“I respect and appreciate people across the political spectrum,” Helmut wrote, adding that the deleted missions were “a misguided expression of shock and confusion over the election results.”
Under Helmut’s leadership, Scientific American began supporting candidates For the first time in 175 years. The editors of the publication endorsed Joe Biden in 2020 and Kamala Harris in Septemberwrote that Donald Trump “endangers public health and safety and ignores evidence, instead favoring senseless conspiracy fantasies.”
In an interview with The Editor’s Desk on the eve of the election, blog about writing and editing In 2020, the editors of Scientific American, authored by Professor Helmut of the University of North Carolina, decided that “it is our responsibility to share our knowledge about health, science, the environment, education, technology. There is a danger for them in this election.”
He added that he supports the approach of journalists telling readers what they know to be true and how they determine the truth, rather than telling readers “both sides” and letting them make up their own minds.
“There are not two reasonable sides to every story. We know that evolution is real and creationism is not; we know that vaccines save lives and do not cause autism; We know climate change is real,” Helmut told Edit Desk. “Besides noting that these issues are politicized, but the science is clear, in any coverage of these issues, creationists, RFK Jr. or quoting climate deniers would be a mistake.”
Robert Kennedy Jr., whom Helmut is referring to, is President-elect Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services. Kennedy made misleading and false claims about vaccines, suggesting they were linked to autism. numerous studies disproving the notion.