Freedom to Bully

The report argues that while open records laws are essential for government transparency, they are increasingly weaponized to target scientists and academics whose work threatens vested interests. By requesting vast amounts of private correspondence, draft papers, and raw data, harassers aim to chill speech, distract researchers from their work, and undermine scientific integrity. The document provides numerous case studies across fields such as climate science, tobacco research, and environmental health, noting that public universities are often unprepared to handle these intrusive requests. It calls for clearer legal exemptions to protect the scientific deliberative process and the development of institutional guidelines to safeguard researchers while maintaining public accountability.

• Broad open records requests are being used as a tool to distract and harass researchers, particularly those whose findings threaten vested interests, which can lead to self-censorship and the avoidance of contentious research topics.
• The transition to electronic communication has increased the vulnerability of researchers, as private deliberations that once occurred in person are now recorded in emails, which are then targeted by requesters.
• Climate scientists have been primary targets of this harassment; for example, the American Tradition Institute (ATI) filed extensive requests for materials from researchers at the University of Virginia and other institutions in Alabama, Arizona, Delaware, and Texas.
• The tobacco industry has a history of using open records laws and subpoenas to target researchers, such as R.J. Reynolds' attempts to access the names and phone numbers of children in a study on brand logo recognition.
• Researchers in environmental health and justice have faced similar attacks, including a case where the North Carolina Pork Council requested the identities of study participants to undermine research on the health impacts of industrial hog operations.
• Public universities are frequently unprepared to handle broad requests, often lacking clear policies or FOIA officers, which leads to inconsistency and confusion in how records are disclosed.
• There is a tension between the need for transparency in university funding and operations and the need to protect the 'scientific deliberative process' from intrusive scrutiny.
• The report recommends that state legislators clarify open records laws to include appropriate exemptions for academics and that professional societies provide legal assistance to researchers facing harassment.

APA

Halpern, M. (2015). Freedom to Bully. Union of Concerned Scientists. https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/09/freedom-to-bully-ucs-2015-final.pdf

Chicago

Halpern, Michael. Freedom to Bully. Union of Concerned Scientists, 2015. https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/09/freedom-to-bully-ucs-2015-final.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Halpern |first1=Michael |title=Freedom to Bully |publisher=Union of Concerned Scientists |date=February 2015 |url=https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/09/freedom-to-bully-ucs-2015-final.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{halpern2015freedom, author = {Halpern, Michael}, title = {{Freedom to Bully}}, institution = {Union of Concerned Scientists}, year = {2015}, month = feb, url = {https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/09/freedom-to-bully-ucs-2015-final.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }