NASA shuts down X accounts as fears swirl about massive cuts to science initiatives
Some of the rudderless agency's accounts told their hundreds of thousands — or even millions — of followers not to be alarmed.
'Don't worry, my mission isn't going anywhere,' accounts for the Perseverance and Curiosity Mars rovers and the Voyager spacecraft assured on Monday.
NASA said its social media portfolio had grown to more than 400 accounts spread out across dozens of platforms.
'While each account has served an important purpose in telling our story, our focus is to improve the user experience through more cohesive messaging. We are reducing the overall number of accounts for a simplified presence that continues to inform, educate, and inspire the public,' NASA's Commercial Crew program account explained.
But followers voiced concerns that streamlining communications — reportedly from 400 accounts down to just 35 — may make communication even more of a challenge for NASA. Some said NASA was 'Thanos snapping,' or described the cull as "Red Wedding Stuff.'
'This account is/was a pioneer of social media,' space journalist Elizabeth Howell said of the Curiosity Rover account.
Not everyone agreed. Spaceflight photographer John Kraus said the effort was 'long overdue' and the 'right direction,' noting that the Orion and Space Launch Systems accounts could be relegated to focus on one for the entire Artemis program.
'How can we inspire the next generation when over 100 accounts on a single platform flood it with frequent posts — often multiple times daily — prioritizing posting for the sake of their own existence over quality content? It's overwhelming,' he said of X. Jared Isaacman, Trump's former pick for NASA administrator, signaled his support for that take.
It comes amid renewed concerns regarding further reductions in personnel and the recently released Fiscal Year 2026 budget proposal.
A summary of the proposal said the Office of Communications would be restructured by eliminating functions 'not statutorily mandated,' consolidating duplicative functions, and automating 'routine tasks.' There are reports claiming this effort is already underway.
Shifting focus largely on human spaceflight, the agency's proposal would slash funding for crucial initiatives that have been the product of decades of research at NASA. Those would include 41 space missions, the agency's climate monitoring satellites and top climate lab, the ongoing Mars Sample Return mission, and upcoming missions to Venus. In all, total funding would be cut by nearly a quarter, and the Planetary Society says there would be a 'devastating 47 percent cut to the agency's science program.' The budget still needs to pass through Congress.
'If enacted, this plan would decimate NASA. It would fire a third of the agency's staff, waste billions of taxpayer dollars, and turn off spacecraft that have been journeying through the Solar System for decades. Humanity would no longer explore the universe as it does today, and our ability to confront deep, cosmic questions would be set back an entire generation,' astrophysicist Dr. Asa Stahl wrote.
Jacqueline McCleary, an assistant professor of physics at Northeastern University, called the proposed budget a 'strategic mistake.'
'Even if you want to dismantle a project or dismantle a satellite, it takes time, it takes resources,' McCleary said. 'You can't just lock the doors and [let] it sit in a warehouse forever. Sudden cuts like these are paradoxically very wasteful of taxpayer money because they're not controlled.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
NASA Continues Testing Multi-Billion Dollar Rocket While Trump Is Actively Trying to Cancel It
Despite president Donald Trump's plans to phase out Boeing's mega-expensive Space Launch System rocket for NASA, the agency is currently trundling ahead with the original plan. As Ars Technica reports, NASA and Northup Grumman tested an experimental hydrogen-based propulsion engine this week that's slated to launch the world's first crewed trip to the Moon as part of the agency's long-awaited Artemis mission. Unfortunately, this week's SLS engine test — the second such test launch in a week — experienced an anomaly during its firing at a facility in Utah. As video of the incident shows, a plume of debris rained down after the rocket's exhaust nozzle shattered. Along with the test failure, other outstanding circumstances are threatening the mission, too. The hydrogen engine from that test isn't supposed to be used until the fifth flight of the SLS — something that won't happen if the Trump Administration gets its way and kiboshes the SLS after just three launches so it can pursue cheaper options. A new bill in Congress aims to push it to at least five — but that's going to be a pretty expensive endeavor. While the current government initially wanted to cancel the SLS so that Elon Musk's SpaceX rockets can take its place, there's good reason for concern about how expensive the rocket has become. In the many years it's taken to bring the SLS to fruition, NASA has spent at least $23 billion worth of taxpayer dollars on building it — and as Ars notes, future missions will cost $4.2 billion per launch, too. With so much uncertainty surrounding the Artemis mission, NASA appears to be powering on with the SLS tests. We can't say how far the mission will go — but either the rocket's going to have a longer life than we thought, or this is all an expensive, bureaucratic mess. More on NASA: NASA Is in Full Meltdown
The Hill
8 hours ago
- The Hill
NASA funding is an ugly casualty of the ‘big, beautiful bill'
The 'big, beautiful bill' recently signed into law enacted a number of tax, spending and regulatory measures. President Trump and his supporters regard the new law as a triumph. Trump's enemies not so much. NASA spending measures are tucked inside the bill that can best be described as ugly, or at the very least ill-advised. As Gizmodo reported, the Trump budget proposal phased out the Space Launch System heavy lift launcher and Orion spacecraft and cancelled the Lunar Gateway space station. After the Artemis III mission, the first crewed lunar landing in decades, NASA would opt for more commercial and sustainable alternatives to maintain a moon exploration campaign. The approach was favored by SpaceX CEO Elon Musk and former NASA administrator nominee Jared Isaacman. Congress chose to ignore the administration's recommendations in favor of a more traditional approach. According to Gizmodo, '$2.6 billion would go toward fully funding Gateway, $4.1 billion would support [Space Launch System], and $20 million would go to the development of Orion.' At least until Artemis V, the return to the moon will follow the plan first set out during the first Trump presidency. The plan was proposed by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), chair of the Senate Commerce Committee. There are two possible reasons for this divergence between the White House and Congress. The cynical explanation is that the Space Launch System, for all of its huge costs, provides a lot of jobs and money in key states and congressional districts. If the project goes away, the jobs and money go away. The less cynical possibility is that although Congress may be in favor of a commercial approach to the moon and Mars in theory, it is skeptical that it will happen in a timely fashion. The long time the Commercial Crew took to get off the ground may be informing this, as is the trouble SpaceX's Starship has been having not blowing up. Whatever the reason for preserving the Space Launch System, the Orion and the Lunar Gateway, — and it may be a combination of the two suggested reasons — it seems to be a step backward in the opening to human civilization of the moon, Mars and beyond. The Space Launch System is simply too expensive to be the centerpiece of an effective and sustainable program to send humans beyond low Earth orbit. Fortunately, the bill is not the end of the story where NASA funding is concerned. Congressional appropriators still have to round out the space agency's spending bill for the next fiscal year. Congress can not only restore some of the draconian cuts that the White House has proposed for NASA's science programs, but it can also start the end-to-end commercial lunar initiative first discussed in a recent piece in Ars Technica. Trump has two things on his plate that he should take care of sooner rather than later. First, he needs to reconstitute the National Space Council with Vice President JD Vance at its head. The Space Council will provide a central point for space policy going forward. Trump has named Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy as interim NASA administrator. Duffy is an able man with political experience and an expressed interest in space. However, he will be spread thin running both the Department of Transportation and the space agency. Trump has to nominate a permanent NASA administrator. The deep-sixing of his previous nomination of billionaire private space traveler Jared Isaacman was an incredible act of self-sabotage that has hurt NASA and Trump's own space policy. Unfortunately, Trump doubled down with an attack on Isaacman in a social media rant against Musk, who had recommended him. Without using Isaacman's name, Trump wrote that Musk 'asked that one of his close friends run NASA.' He said he initially thought the friend was 'very good,' but 'was surprised to learn that he was a blue blooded Democrat, who had never contributed to a Republican before.' He added, 'I also thought it inappropriate that a very close friend of Elon, who was in the Space Business, run NASA, when NASA is such a big part of Elon's corporate life.' As Space News notes, Isaacman is a moderate Republican who donated to both parties, a common practice for businessmen (including Trump when he was in the private sector). His ties to Musk derive from the fact that SpaceX is the only company that can provide private crewed spaceflight services. Why Trump would post such claims is open to speculation. Likely he is being lied to by staffers who dislike Musk. If the president cannot bring himself to rectify his mistake of withdrawing Isaacman's nomination, he needs to name a suitable replacement, and the sooner the better. Then Congress should fast track that person's confirmation so that he or she can start to revitalize NASA as a world-class space agency. America's future as a space power depends on it. Mark R. Whittington, who writes frequently about space policy, has published a political study of space exploration entitled 'Why is It So Hard to Go Back to the Moon?' as well as 'The Moon, Mars and Beyond,' and, most recently, 'Why is America Going Back to the Moon?' He blogs at Curmudgeons Corner.
Business Insider
8 hours ago
- Business Insider
Firefly Aerospace Files for IPO after Moon Landing and 6x Revenue Growth
Firefly Aerospace has filed for an initial public offering on the Nasdaq under the ticker 'FLY,' aiming to turn its recent momentum into capital for expansion. The Texas-based space and defense company made headlines in March 2025 with the successful lunar landing of its Blue Ghost lander. The mission, part of NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services program, marked the first time a commercial vehicle landed and operated on the Moon for over 14 days. NASA paid $145 million for delivery and science experiments combined. Elevate Your Investing Strategy: Take advantage of TipRanks Premium at 50% off! Unlock powerful investing tools, advanced data, and expert analyst insights to help you invest with confidence. Make smarter investment decisions with TipRanks' Smart Investor Picks, delivered to your inbox every week. Sound Financials and Rising Revenue The company's revenue jumped 6x to $55.9 million in the most recent year. More importantly, Firefly holds a $1.1 billion contract backlog across launch and lunar services. That includes work with NASA, Lockheed Martin (LMT), and Northrop Grumman (NOC), giving it a level of revenue visibility that many early-stage aerospace firms lack. Firefly's main launch vehicle, the Alpha rocket, has experienced a few hiccups since its debut in 2021. The rocket reached operational status in 2023 and has since completed missions for NASA and other commercial customers. Alpha's design features carbon composite materials and proprietary engine technology. It can carry up to 1,030 kg to low Earth orbit. As of April 2025, Alpha has six launches under its belt, with four experiencing partial or full failure. Despite that, Firefly is increasing production to support rideshare and dedicated launches. The company is also developing a medium-lift rocket called Eclipse in partnership with Northrop Grumman, which invested $50 million in May 2025. Eclipse is expected to carry 16,300 kg to low Earth orbit and 3,200 kg to geosynchronous transfer orbit. It uses upgraded versions of Alpha's propulsion systems and components from Northrop's Antares program. The first launch is targeted for 2026. Not Competing Directly with SpaceX Firefly operates in the small to medium payload segment, a part of the market that remains less crowded than heavy-lift. Its backlog suggests strong demand, while the Blue Ghost mission demonstrated its ability to deliver complex government payloads on time. Firefly is not directly competing with larger players like SpaceX in the mega-constellation or heavy-lift categories. Still, it does offer bundled services including launch, lunar delivery, and orbital support. The FLY IPO will be one to watch for investors looking for exposure to commercial space firms with real revenue, government contracts, and a proven track record in both launch and lunar missions. Using TipRanks' comparison tool, we've assembled and compared the notable tickers in the Aerospace and Defense sector. This helps investors gain a proper perspective on each stock's performance and the industry as a whole.
