Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share March 18, 2026 — More Harm Than Good
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
March 18, 2026 — More Harm Than Good
A recent episode of Paris Marx’s “Tech Won’t Save Us” podcast featured Tim Schwab, author of the 2023 book, The Bill Gates Problem: Reckoning with the Myth of the Good Billionaire. Recent revelations about Gates and Jeffrey Epstein have led to a reckoning at the Gates Foundation, making Schwab’s book more relevant and causing us to pause and revisit the role of the Gates Foundation and funders in general in the scientific and scholarly publishing space.
Started to reputation-wash himself after Microsoft lost its 2001 anti-trust case — with Gates himself testifying in a memorable set of exchanges — the Gates Foundation’s reputation has been eroding for some time. The Epstein Files may be the end of the line for this effort to rehabilitate Gates’ reputation.
As we write in our upcoming book, Gates is not alone in trying to use money to influence priorities in science, medicine, and scientific publishing:
Five funders rose to prominence in “open” scientific publishing relatively quickly — Max Planck, HHMI, Wellcome, Gates, and CZI — representing an interesting historical trajectory of wealth shifting from nation-states to manufacturing to chemistry to computer science to social media. In some ways, it is the preceding century in a nutshell.
They are all proving problematic.
We discuss Phase 1 of funder involvement, and how this has created a bridge into a more dire potential Phase 2 as MAHA grifters have learned the tricks of sheltering cash and spending on grifter science.
We also share our Discoveries of the Week.
Music provided by Provoke the Truth — https://provokethetruth.net/
View all episodes
By Caldera Information Solutions LLCA recent episode of Paris Marx’s “Tech Won’t Save Us” podcast featured Tim Schwab, author of the 2023 book, The Bill Gates Problem: Reckoning with the Myth of the Good Billionaire. Recent revelations about Gates and Jeffrey Epstein have led to a reckoning at the Gates Foundation, making Schwab’s book more relevant and causing us to pause and revisit the role of the Gates Foundation and funders in general in the scientific and scholarly publishing space.
Started to reputation-wash himself after Microsoft lost its 2001 anti-trust case — with Gates himself testifying in a memorable set of exchanges — the Gates Foundation’s reputation has been eroding for some time. The Epstein Files may be the end of the line for this effort to rehabilitate Gates’ reputation.
As we write in our upcoming book, Gates is not alone in trying to use money to influence priorities in science, medicine, and scientific publishing:
Five funders rose to prominence in “open” scientific publishing relatively quickly — Max Planck, HHMI, Wellcome, Gates, and CZI — representing an interesting historical trajectory of wealth shifting from nation-states to manufacturing to chemistry to computer science to social media. In some ways, it is the preceding century in a nutshell.
They are all proving problematic.
We discuss Phase 1 of funder involvement, and how this has created a bridge into a more dire potential Phase 2 as MAHA grifters have learned the tricks of sheltering cash and spending on grifter science.
We also share our Discoveries of the Week.
Music provided by Provoke the Truth — https://provokethetruth.net/