A major US government website supporting public education on climate science looks likely to be shuttered after almost all of its staff were fired, the Guardian has learned.
Climate.gov, the gateway website for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa)’s Climate Program Office, will imminently no longer publish new content, according to multiple former staff responsible for the site’s content whose contracts were recently terminated.
“The entire content production staff at climate.gov (including me) were let go from our government contract on 31 May,” said a former government contractor who wished to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation. “We were told that our positions within the contract were being eliminated.”
Rebecca Lindsey, the website’s former program manager, who was fired in February as part of the government’s purge of probationary employees, described a months-long situation within Noaa where political appointees and career staff argued over the fate of the website.
“I had gotten a stellar performance review, gotten a bonus, gotten a raise. I was performing very well. And then I was part of that group who got the form letter saying, ‘Your knowledge, skills, and abilities are no longer of use to Noaa’ – or something to that effect.”
Lindsey said she had been worried thatclimate.govmight be a target of the new administration soon after the election, but when a large Noaa contract was up for renewal at the end of May, her former boss told her that a demand came “from above” to rewrite parts of the contract to remove the team’s funding.
“It was a very deliberate, targeted attack,” said Lindsey.
Lindsey said the content forclimate.govwascreated and maintained by a contracted staff of about 10, with additional contributions from Noaa scientists, and its editorial content was specifically designed to be politically neutral, and faithful to the current state of the sciences. All of those staff have now been dismissed, she said.
“We operated exactly how you would want an independent, nonpartisan communications group to operate,” said Lindsey, and noted thatclimate.govis housed within the science division of Noaa, not its public affairs division. “It does seem to be part of this sort of slow and quiet way of trying to keep science agencies from providing information to the American public about climate.”
Noaa has been contacted for comment. It’s unclear whether the website will remain visible to the public.
The climate.gov site was housed within the Communication, Education, and Engagement Division of Noaa, whichdescribes itselfas “the largest team in the federal government dedicated to climate communication, education, and engagement”.
The website receives hundreds of thousands of visits per month and is one of the most popular sources of information about climate science on the internet.
The fired staff believe the changes to climate.gov were targeted by political appointees within theTrump administrationand specifically aimed at restricting public-facing climate information.
“It’s targeted, I think it’s clear,” said Tom Di Liberto, a former Noaa spokespersonwho was also firedfrom his position earlier this year. “They only fired a handful of people, and it just so happened to be the entire content team for climate.gov. I mean, that’s a clear signal.”
The purge spared two web developers, which Di Liberto says is a concerning sign.
The contractor said: “My bigger worry, long-term, is I would hate to see it turn into a propaganda website for this administration, because that’s not at all what it was.”
The contractor said that while there will still be some pre-written, scheduled content posted on the site this month, there are no plans for further new content: “After that, we have no idea what will happen to the website.”
Lindsey said she also fears a “sinister possibility” that the administration may co-optclimate.govto publish its own anti-science content. Lindsey said the administration could now “provide a content team from the Heartland Institute, leveraging our audience, our brand, our millions of people that we reach on social media every month. That’s the worst-case scenario.”
“Climate.gov is one heck of a URL. If you wanted to basically keep the website alive to do something with later, this is what you would do if you’re the [Trump] administration,” said Di Liberto. “It’s clear that the administration does not accept climate science, so it’s certainly concerning.”
The cuts also mean that there is now also no one left to run climate.gov social media accounts, which have hundreds of thousands of followers. Since staff in charge of climate.gov did a lot of pushback on misinformation, their absence may help anti-science information flourish there more readily.
“We were an extremely well-trusted source for climate information, misinformation and disinformation because we actually, legitimately would answer misinformation questions,” said the contractor. “We’d answer reader emails and try to combat disinformation on social media.
“We get attacked on social media by people who don’t believe in climate change, and that’s increased over the last six months or so as well.”
The shutdown comes amid broader cuts to science funding across the government, including “significant reductions to education, grants, research, and climate-related programs within Noaa”, as stated in the2026 “passback” budgetCongress is currently deliberating.
“It seems like if they can’t get rid of all the research, what they can do is make it impossible for anyone to know about it,” said Di Liberto.
The contractor said they worry that what may have begun as a heavy-handed attempt by administration officials to limit public knowledge of human-caused climate change will have broader impacts on public education on the cyclical drivers of weather – as well as the results of publicly funded research conducted by Noaa scientists.
“To me, climate is more broad than just climate change. It’s also climate patterns likeEl NiñoandLa Niña. Halting factual climate information is a disservice to the public. Hiding the impacts of climate change won’t stop it from happening, it will just make us far less prepared when it does.”