Letter to the editor: "If ACS won’t stand up now, it should stand down."

Via Chemical and Engineering News, this letter: 

ACS Comment on supporting science

The March 24, 2025, edition of C&EN had a report by Wayne E. Jones Jr., chair of the American Chemical Society Board of Directors (page 41). Dr. Jones, you are complicit in your silence: the elephant in the room is Donald J. Trump. The president has single-handedly destroyed one of the greatest science enterprises the world has ever seen. I am reminded of Germany circa the 1930s. Things are not OK.

I have been a member of ACS for nearly 50 years. It seems that the organization is a clique whose mission is to give one another awards, ensure promotion and tenure, and receive grants. Thanks to the attack on science by this administration, the clique is about to crumble. Your colleagues will lose grant money, their students won’t get jobs or even graduate, the international postdocs you thought you would hire won’t get visas, and universities won’t get funding for overhead. In short, the research environment in the US is in shambles.

Jones’s report is spineless­—unwilling to take a risk, timid—and irrelevant. If ACS won’t stand up now, it should stand down.

Larry Lewis 

Niskayuna, New York

Well, I can't say I disagree much.  

 

ACS takes down Inclusivity Style Guide for revision

Via Bluesky, the American Chemical Society worked on a very thorough style guide for inclusivity. The portions on “Gender and Sexuality” and on “Race, Ethnicity, and Sexuality” were apparently recently taken down. Here is the response from Rajendrani Mukhopadhyay, the senior vice president for Inclusion and Belonging when Kelly Sheppard of Skidmore College wrote in: 

Dear Dr. Sheppard,

Thank you for reaching out about the American Chemical Society's Inclusivity Style Guide.

As part of our work to develop a new strategic plan, ACS updated one of our core values to recognize inclusion and belonging for all people, as follows: "We create environments where people from diverse backgrounds, cultures, perspectives, and experiences thrive."

This core value is at the heart of all ACS resources, including the Inclusivity Style Guide.

The updated core value reflects the long and transformative work ACS has done to create an inclusive environment where everyone belongs and flourishes. It builds on ACS' past work and prioritizes the ongoing achievement of certain goals, including attainment of full, authentic participation and fair treatment across all identities and experiences.

ACS remains fully committed to inclusion and belonging. We have not abandoned our core value; rather, we are refining our resources to ensure they remain impactful in current times.

We want to ensure that the guide continues be a useful and accurate tool for creating inclusive content and communications. To protect the integrity of the guide, we have paused specific sections for review and refinement, so they remain effective. Once this review is completed, we will repost the updated sections.

We understand the frustration, concern and hurt this has caused. We welcome constructive dialogue and input to ensure that our inclusivity resources meet the needs of our community. This guide is one tool in ACS' broader effort to foster inclusion.

We truly value your membership in ACS. Please let me know if you'd like to discuss this matter.

Best regards, Rajendrani (Raj) Mukhopadhyay

Rajendrani Mukhopadhyay (she/her) Senior Vice President, Inclusion and Belonging

It is both very weird and very emblematic of ACS that they would make these changes without really answering any questions about it (and pretending that it isn't about our current political climate.) I guess we'll see what the new sections look like when they come out, and then we can make further judgments. 

Washington Examiner: ACS being sued for race-based ACS Scholars program

Via the Washington Examiner: 

Nation’s top chemistry group sued over race-based scholarship

By Kaelan Deese

March 5, 2025 10:45 am

EXCLUSIVE — The nation’s largest network for scientists and chemists is facing a legal challenge over a scholarship program that allegedly blocks students from applying based on race.

The American Chemical Society, or ACS, is facing a federal lawsuit claiming its ACS Scholars Program unlawfully excludes white and Asian students, reserving eligibility for “historically underrepresented” groups such as black, Hispanic, and Native American applicants. The complaint, filed in Washington D.C. federal court by the nonprofit organization Do No Harm, argues that the program violates the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

At the center of the lawsuit is a high-achieving high school senior who was instantly deemed ineligible after disclosing her multiracial background. Identified in the lawsuit as “Member A,” she holds a 4.34 GPA, a perfect ACT science score, and a 5 on the AP Chemistry exam. The lawsuit argues ACS shut her out solely because of her race.

Here's the text of the lawsuit. I'm probably too close to both the subject matter (college admissions) and the ACS to comment rationally, but suffice it to say that I am unimpressed with the lawsuit. I think that's the limit of what I have to say in public on the matter. 

Nevertheless, a mission of this blog is to cover the American Chemical Society with a certain level of independence and to provide analysis. As an analytical matter, I don't see ACS being willing to put up with a lot of political pressure nor being willing to spend a lot of money on this. I'm not a lawyer, and so it will be interesting to see how far this gets in the courts. 

Will the ACS address the Trump Administration's attack on academic funding?

I made a series of comments on Bluesky (more or less off the cuff), but I guess I'll make them here as well. I was thoroughly unimpressed with ACS' recent statement "in support of science": 

...Each year, the American Chemical Society develops a U.S. public policy agenda that outlines how the organization will work with Congress and the administration throughout the course of the year. The agenda is shared at the start of the year when both bodies are traditionally preparing for the year ahead. But the start of this year has been different with federal actions coming immediately. The resulting changes in the federal landscape have been swift, leaving many unsure about what lies ahead. 

We are seeing changes occurring that have potential impacts on the areas of research eligible for federal funding, the types of scientific data being reported, and the level of indirect costs associated with federal biomedical research grants. These are just some of the potential impacts facing the scientific enterprise, with new actions emerging each day...

We're in this moment that we don't really understand, with a real "fog of war" aspect, because the government simply is not actually talking about what they are doing. The Trump White House* appears to be attacking American scientific academia by cutting off funding from NSF and NIH, and slowing the process of grants and cutting indirect costs to the point that universities are beginning to slow PhD admissions (although things seem to be unfreezing now.) 

I've observed ACS leadership long enough to know that political courage or speed are simply not in the cards, and I recognize that they are probably trying to avoid attracting attention, and that the Trump Administration seems very likely to attack non-profits through the tax system for punishment. Nevertheless, simple acknowledgement of what is happening and the level of seeming existential alarm that is taking place in American academia does not seem forthcoming. I desperately hope to be proven wrong, but I'm not holding my breath. 

As I said, surely ACS leadership is working on a plan to petition the government for a redress of American academic chemistry grievances. I hope to see that plan, and very soon. 

*(seeing as how a lot of the ructions started well before, say, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. was confirmed.) 

Dorothy Phillips has been elected ACS president-elect

Via Chemical and Engineering News (article by Sara Cottle): 

Dorothy J. Phillips, retired from the role of director of strategic marketing at Waters, has been elected the American Chemical Society 2024 president-elect by members of ACS. Phillips will serve as society president in 2025 and immediate past president in 2026. The appointment also includes serving on the board of directors from 2024 through 2026.

A total of 11,428 votes were cast for president-elect. Voter participation was 12% of all eligible voters.

With 6,653 votes, Phillips won the president-elect race against Florian J. Schattenmann, chief technology officer and vice president of research and development and innovation at Cargill, who received 4,775 votes. ACS, which publishes C&EN, also elected four other people into ACS positions and voted on a petition that was up for approval in the fall 2023 election cycle.

Full article here.  

ACS demographics

Via Chemical and Engineering News, news that ACS has released a demographics report (article by Krystal Vasquez): 

The American Chemical Society has released its first report exploring the demographics of its membership. According to the report, tracking this data will help the society achieve the fifth goal of its strategic plan: to “embrace and advance inclusion in chemistry.” The data can also help ACS better tailor programs and services to its members, the report says.

The report was produced by the ACS Office of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Respect, with help from ACS Society Business Solutions, using a number of internal data sources for 2022, such as the annual ACS salary survey. It examines demographic data across multiple axes, including gender, race and ethnicity, and age. 

• Men and women are also more evenly distributed in the overall US workforce at 52% and 48%, respectively, according to the US Census Bureau.
• In terms of race and ethnicity, 70.3% of ACS members identify as white. That value falls to 64% in the overall US STEM workforce and drops another two percentage points in the US workforce more generally.
• Asian and Pacific Islander ACS members make up the next-largest racial and ethnic group at 19%, followed by Hispanic members at 4.5%, and Black and African American members at 2.9%.
• ACS members lean older than the general workforce. Over half list their age as 51 years or more, compared to 35% for the overall US workforce, according to the Census Bureau.
• The report says 63% of members have a doctorate or equivalent, and nearly half work in academia

It is amusing to see in the numbers that the ACS leans older, more PhD-heavy and academic. That's about right, and it's fascinating to see it. 

Dick Zare calls for investigation into C&EN during Spring ACS meeting

Pretty remarkable statement during the recent Rudy Baum symposium at the Spring ACS meeting in Indianapolis. I can't imagine that there will actually be an independent investigation (by whom?) of what transpired within C&EN, but it is notable nonetheless. 

We're not in charge either

In this week's C&EN, this comment from the chair of the Society Committee on Publications, Christopher K. Ober: 

The Society Committee on Publications (SCOP) has several tasks, but foremost is its role to review and assess the editorial quality and content of the ACS publication program. The membership of SCOP reflects the broad makeup of ACS in all its diversity. Each year, one member is appointed by the ACS president, another by the chair of the ACS Board of Directors, and any additional members are appointed jointly using advice from the Committee on Committees. The chair of SCOP also serves as the chair of the C&EN Editorial Board. SCOP membership serves to connect society members, users of ACS publications, and ACS governing bodies. A term for SCOP membership is 3 years and each member is permitted up to two consecutive 3-year terms.

In the midst of this essay, this grimly amusing comment: 

While the SCOP chair serves as the chair of the C&EN Editorial Board, and the C&EN editor in chief provides a report for each SCOP meeting, the committee has no formal role in advising C&EN. SCOP received news of the recent change in editorial leadership at C&EN at the same time as ACS membership. SCOP looks forward to news on what the changes will mean to C&EN and its ongoing success.

Makes you wonder - is ACS executive leadership unaccountable to ACS governance when it wants to be? (You don't have to wonder.)  

New ACS CEO Al Horvath on C&EN

In this week's C&EN, this comment from Al Horvath, the new CEO of ACS: 

...I fully support safeguards that ensure our journalists have the necessary independence to pursue the stories that are most important to our readers and to the chemical enterprise as a whole. We are guided in this endeavor by C&EN’s standards and practices, which clearly articulate the important elements for guaranteeing that my C&EN colleagues have the latitude to do their job in the manner they deem most effective. This principle is nonnegotiable.

To underscore this commitment, I made the decision to move C&EN to the ACS Publications Division. This change was made following consultation with a number of colleagues inside and outside the society, including C&EN staff members with deep experience in such matters. It quickly became clear that this organizational change would demonstrate that C&EN has the independence and leeway to cover the issues most important to the chemistry community.

Supporting the high-quality journalism that delivers these stories and producing a multifaceted publication like C&EN comes with a substantial price tag. ACS will continue to provide the financial resources that C&EN requires to achieve its mission....

I'm kind of amused the editorial makes it seem like it's always been in the Publications Division, when we all know that it was moved (disastrously, it turns out) to the Communications Division in 2021. 

(In all sincerity, it is good that Al Horvath is laying down a marker with some pretty unequivocal language. Here's hoping that it is good for the length of his term as CEO. We shall see...)

You Break It, You Fix It

I have been waiting patiently for the new ACS executive leadership and new leadership of Chemical and Engineering News to offer some kind of a vision or a plan for 2023 and beyond. My hopes have been seemingly dashed so far. 

Rather, this last week has seen a spate of resignations of additional long-time staff from C&EN: 

By some counts, 21 of 47 C&EN editorial/creative staffers have left since March 2021; 2 were fired in December, 5 more (including the above) have left since then. 

• Executive Editor Dorea Reeser
• Senior Correspondent Andrea Widener
• Opinion Editor Alexandra Taylor 

Whatever the reasons ACS had to move C&EN from Publications to Communications, the change and the damage has been done, and it appears to be irreversible. 

While I do care about HOW we got here, I am desperate to understand WHAT is going to be done next. I sense that the magazine has had difficulties in filling positions. That's not a surprise - why would you join a place that is hemorrhaging workers? What is the new leadership doing to change that? Is there a vision? How about a plan? Are there attempts to retain current staffers? If not, why? What plan does ACS have to rehabilitate the image of C&EN? 

I have a second related question: it's abundantly clear that this change happened with the approval of the highest executive management of the Society. Some (Tom Connelly) have left. Why should we trust those leaders who made this clearly disastrous change with fixing it? 

This ACS press release is an embarrassment

Via the ACS newsroom: 

In a joint statement from ACS Chair of the Board of Directors Paul W. Jagodzinski and ACS CEO Thomas Connelly Jr., the American Chemical Society (ACS) reaffirms its support of its independent news outlet, Chemical & Engineering News (C&EN):

“We want to assure you that the American Chemical Society remains fully committed to the success of Chemical & Engineering News. The recent reorganization of C&EN as described in Monday’s editorial positions C&EN to better provide our membership with information about ACS activities and efforts. The change does not impact C&EN’s ability to continue to produce the independent, world-class science journalism that it is known for.

“With the full support of ACS, C&EN remains committed to its mission of gathering and delivering news and stories for professionals in the chemistry enterprise from academia, industry and beyond that they cannot find anywhere else. As a top member benefit, we will continue to do all we can to provide direction and resources for C&EN that position it for the future.”

Pardon my language, but are you f------g kidding me? You fire the editor in chief and the most senior editor, and you tell me that this change "better provides our membership with information about ACS activities and efforts"? In what way? 

This is an appalling empty statement from Board Chair Jagodzinski and the outgoing CEO. This statement has no plans, no vision, no ideas as to how the removal of Drs. Campos-Seijo and Kemsley will "better provide [the Society] with information about ACS activities and efforts." The ACS would be better off coming up with trumped-up charges that (I dunno) Jyllian Kemsley was personally stuffing Professor Molenium into a locker on 16th Street than this baloney. 

I would rather that the ACS leadership simply did not make any statement at all than to bring this baloney out and pretend that it will mollify myself or anyone who cares about Chemical and Engineering News.  What a complete embarrassment, and utter disrespect of the membership. I am so disappointed.

An unforced error

Last Monday, the editor in chief of Chemical and Engineering News, Bibiana Campos-Seijo and the most senior editor, Jyllian Kemsley, were both removed from their positions at the magazine. Here is the explanation from the publisher of the magazine, Dr. Susan Morrissey. 

I consider Jyllian Kemsley a friend and a mentor. She is smart, principled and a dedicated science journalist. Her work at C&EN about the Sheri Sangji case was foundational, and a model of how to cover a sweeping story with impacts across American chemical academia. Her influence on how we view and understand academic chemical safety over the last 10+ years is extraordinary. It will take another ten years to develop another reporter to cover these issues with the skill and tenacity Jyllian brought, I estimate, and it remains to be seen if that will ever be in the works. 

There will be lots of opportunities to decry the planned changes at C&EN (and I plan to take them!) but for now, in the words of Matt Hartings, eliminating her position was an unforced error and it does not bode well for the direction of Chemical and Engineering News at all. I hope I am wrong. My continued best wishes for the staff of this incredibly important magazine to our community.

If you'd like to contact ACS leadership to register your disappointment with these moves, I suggest the following folks to be contacted. 

• Tom Connelly (current CEO): t_connelly@acs.org
• Al Horvath (incoming CEO): a_horvath@acs.org

Be polite, forthright and succinct. 

Best wishes to Bibi and Jyllian, the remaining staff of C&EN, and to all of us. 

An open letter to the members of the American Chemical Society

Friend of the blog Matt Hartings has published an open letter, signed by current and former members of the C&EN Advisory Board. Here's the most newsworthy portion of the letter: 

...Over the last few days, the Advisory Board’s concern for the magazine’s editorial independence has deepened. It appears that ACS News (awards, governance, happenings, etc.) will take priority over news from the chemical enterprise. Dr. Campos Seijo and senior editor Dr. Jyllian Kemsley were fired on Monday, December 12th. In a message to the Advisory Board, C&EN’s publisher stated, “This reorganization will better position C&EN for the future, allowing it to strengthen its focus on its role as the official organ for the American Chemical Society (emphasis ours).” These changes are made despite years of focus group studies showing that, among the different types of stories C&EN reports, readers prefer science coverage, followed by business, policy, and education content. ACS News has always been the lowest priority in these focus groups.

For many, C&EN is the primary benefit to ACS membership. We rely on their journalists for their deep insight into chemistry and chemical engineering and their exemplary journalistic standards. There is no other magazine that covers the chemical enterprise quite like C&EN. It is required reading for anyone whose career interfaces with chemistry, the central science. Losing C&EN to a change in editorial focus will be a tremendous blow for all of us. This wholesale mission change is one that we cannot stand behind.

Read the whole thing. 

ACS CEO Thomas Connelly to retire at the end of 2022

Via C&EN (article by Bibiana Campos Seijo):

American Chemical Society chief executive officer Thomas Connelly will retire at the end of 2022 after more than 7 years of service as its CEO. ACS publishes C&EN.

“Tom has provided strong leadership for ACS throughout his tenure, especially over the past two years as we experienced a once in a lifetime challenge due to the COVID-19 pandemic,” says Paul W. Jagodzinski, chair of the ACS Board of Directors, in a press release. “We look forward to Tom’s continued leadership through the rest of 2022 and wish him all the best as he enters the next chapter of his life in 2023.”

...The ACS Board of Directors will start the search for a new CEO immediately. The Board intends to identify a successor before the end of the year to ensure continuity.

Complexity in ACS governance

In this week's C&EN,  

In mid-February, ChemBark resigned American Chemical Society membership as a protest, announced via Twitter. The issues are real, but personally, I’ve never understood quitting as a protest when the fix requires work. ACS is a large, complex organization, and the subscription fees, executive compensation, and governance are certainly issues worth considering with respect to our society’s mission. Mostly, I was drawn to ChemBark’s comment “lack of transparency in operations and governance” in the tweet. 

Reflecting on the routine editorials appearing in this magazine promoting diversity in chemistry, I think that comment highlights how we, as a scientific society, are far from those aims. In the nearly century and a half of ACS’s existence, the systemic racism, sexism, and structures that have marginalized various identities in society at large have become baked into the structure of ACS, and no pathway program will change that. We have complex rules that consolidate authority. 

A good example of this complexity is the different structures for how officers are elected in the various technical divisions, something I’ve observed from membership in several. Another good example is award committees. I recently served on a committee where I was the youngest member of an all-White, all-male group. Honestly, I am also a little unclear on how I came to serve. It may have been from entering my name in the Yellow Book, a process of which I was unaware until I chaired my local section.

In short, we have needless complexity and structure that protects privilege. It is built into our documents, bylaws, and rules. To be serious about supporting diversity, we need to be more transparent, and a tremendous part of that is in our governance, how it works, and how it is accessible to members. I am ready to roll up my sleeves and help, but ACS-wide structural revision needs to be led from the top.

Rory Waterman 

Burlington, Vermont

UPDATE (March 23, 2022): It appears that I deleted or didn't add my thoughts to Professor Waterman's comments. In my experience, he is correct - ACS governance is unnecessarily complex, and mostly has to do with the overgrowth of a hundred years of self-governance by committee. I believe there have been various simplification initiatives over the past number of years, but they haven't been particularly successful. 

Complexity is a feature, not a bug, for insiders and those with experience in ACS governance. If the Society wants to invite new people in, making things simpler might be a way to get there. 

A final thought: it's not clear to me that ACS volunteer governance is particularly important to the day-to-day or even the year-to-year operations of ACS. Long time friends know that I describe ACS governance more church-like than corporation-like. Some churches, the congregation and its lay leaders hold the power, and the hired staff (the pastor) is relatively weak. Some churches, it's vice versa. I think it's pretty clear that ACS is the latter, not the former. 

A complaint about ACS Publications

From this week's C&EN, this interesting complaint: 

I just received an email advertisement from the American Chemical Society, which is now offering Authoring Services, and I have concerns. I am a longtime member of the society and have performed many hours of volunteer service over the years, as do other members. As a freelance professional writer and editor, I feel a level of threat from the society as it offers services that are in direct competition with my livelihood. I know that I cannot be alone in this concern. It is curious how the society touts the benefits of membership regarding employment and career but then engages in activities that may have a real negative impact on the amount of work its members can generate. 

When I was helping as a coauthor of ACS textbooks, I would hear similar concerns from members who also published textbooks. At that time, I was told to inform them that ACS textbooks were created in order to push the text industry in terms of new pedagogy and that it was not the society’s intent to make a significant amount of money on texts. But as ACS strives to generate income in more and more areas that infringe on its members’ ability to earn, I would very much appreciate it if ACS executives could enlighten us and alleviate our concerns.

Carl E. Heltzel

Seneca, South Carolina

This sets up an interesting challenge from the governance perspective. I don't know if Mr. Heltzel would be successful in rallying sufficient numbers of members to petition the ACS Council, but let's say that they did. Could the ACS Council stop ACS Publications from offering this service? Theoretically, I suspect the answer is "yes", but I imagine that in reality, the answer is "no." (I genuinely can't imagine that Pubs gets all that much from authoring services, but who knows...) 

ACS Spring National meeting cancelled

If you haven't heard already: 

Cancellation of ACS Spring 2020 National Meeting & Expo 

Safety is a core value of the American Chemical Society, and as such the health and well-being of our members, community and staff are paramount. As a result, we are cancelling (terminating) the ACS Spring 2020 National Meeting & Expo scheduled for March 22-26, 2020, in Philadelphia.

The FAQ is here. 

The 2017 ACS Form 990

This was 2017's form 990. (Here are the other ones: 2016, 2015 and 2014.)

ACS executive director Thomas Connelly made $893,157 in 2016. Looks like he made $991,787 in 2017. 10.9% increase, must have been a good year.

ACS Boston Career Fair: 62 jobs, 539 job seekers

Numbers reported to the ACS Council on Thursday, August 23 (link goes to Powerpoint):

Number of Employers: 48
Number of Jobs Posted: 62
Active Job Seekers: 539
Career Counselor Interactions: 544

As I recall, that's a pretty good ratio, although I suspect that the number of available positions is down somewhat. It's surprising to me that there weren't more positions for Boston, but I suppose that if I were a Boston-based employer, it's not clear to me that I would be exhibiting at the ACS National Meeting, instead of just holding an open house...

I can't even begin to understand what's going on here yet, but...

...this is a pretty interesting Twitter thread to come out of ACS Boston.

In other relevant Twitter/ACS Boston news:

The editors’ decision is in! JACS will now consider submissions of manuscripts previously posted as preprints on @ChemRxiv.  Details to follow…

Commence the pre-printing! (I regret that I am terribly proud of this pre-tweet on Friday.)