Featured Post from University of Connecticut

UConn's Amanda J. Crawford on one Sandy Hook family's 'epic fight'

Aug 18, 2022

2 min

Amanda J. Crawford


Since December 14, 2012, the families of 18 children and six adults murdered at Sandy Hook Elementary School have been forced to live amidst a tidal wave of conspiracy theorists and their constant lies, threats, and harassment.


As lawsuits challenging some of the most vocal purveyors of that misinformation are working through the court system, the stories of the hardships faced by some of these families -- endured while they have tried to grieve their unimaginable loss -- have brought new attention to the profound and negative effects that the wildfire spread of misinformation has on the lives of the people most impacted.



Amanda J. Crawford, an assistant professor with the UConn Department of Journalism who studies misinformation and conspiracy theories, offers the story of one family in an in-depth and heartbreaking, but critically important, story for the Boston Globe Magazine:


Lenny knew online chatter about the shadow government or some such conspiracy was all but inevitable. When a neuroscience graduate student killed 12 and injured dozens of moviegoers with a semiautomatic assault rifle in Aurora in July, five months prior, there had been allegations about government mind control.

When Lenny searched his son’s name in early January 2013, he was disgusted at the speculation about the shooting. People called it a false flag. Mistakes in news coverage had become “anomalies” that conspiracy theorists claimed as proof of a coverup. Why did the shooter’s name change? Why did the guns keep changing? Press conferences were analyzed for clues. Vance’s threat to prosecute purveyors of misinformation was taken as an indication they were onto something.

But what concerned Lenny most was their callous scrutiny of the victims and their families. Some people claimed a photo of a victim’s little sister with Obama really showed the dead girl still alive. Others speculated the murdered children never existed at all. They called parents and other relatives “crisis actors” paid to perform a tragedy. And yet, they also criticized them for not performing their grief well enough. There were even claims specifically about Veronique. Lenny needed to warn her.

“There are some really dark, twisted people out there calling this a hoax,” he told her.

Veronique didn’t understand. There was so much news coverage, so many witnesses. “How could that possibly be?”

“If you put yourself out there, people will question your story,” Lenny cautioned.

Veronique thought he must be exaggerating a few comments from a dark corner of the Web. This can’t possibly gain traction, she thought. No, no, no! Truth matters. If I tell my story, people will be able to see that I am a mother who is grieving.



Amanda J. Crawford is a veteran political reporter, literary journalist, and expert in journalism ethics, misinformation, conspiracy theories, and the First Amendment. Click on her icon now to arrange an interview with her today.


Connect with:
Amanda J. Crawford

Amanda J. Crawford

Assistant Professor

Professor Crawford is a veteran political reporter, literary journalist, and expert in journalism ethics and misinformation.

Literary JournalismMediaNews LiteracyMisinformationJournalism Ethics
Powered by

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from University of Connecticut

It's Sports Science Week on The Academic Minute -- an entire week dedicated to UConn experts featured image

1 min

It's Sports Science Week on The Academic Minute -- an entire week dedicated to UConn experts

The Academic Minute is a two-and-a-half minute daily brief featuring researchers from colleges and universities around the world, keeping listeners abreast of what’s new and exciting in the academy. A different professor is featured each day, offering updates on groundbreaking research and how it helps us better understand the world around us. Hosted by Dr. Lynn Pasquerella, president of the American Association of Colleges and Universities, The Academic Minute airs on 70 stations around the United States and Canada, and twice daily on it's home station WAMC - Northeast Public Radio. This week, the entire program was focused on the science of sport with a new featured UConn expert each day. Monday Julie P. Burland, director of research at the Institute for Sports Medicine, examines how to predict in-season injuries for athletes. Tuesday Jennifer B. Fields, Assistant Professor in the Department of Nutritional Sciences, investigates why so many young athletes are flunking nutrition. Wednesday Dimitris Xygalatas, associate professor of anthropology, looks at sports fans for clues on how social rituals bind us together. Thursday Rebecca L. Stearns, associate professor-in-residence in the Department of Kinesiology, details potential strategies to prevent sudden deaths in sports. Friday Robert Huggins, assistant professor in the Department of Kinesiology, examines why there aren’t more athletic trainers on-hand at sporting events.

A Crisis of Caring featured image

3 min

A Crisis of Caring

Laura Mauldin's rule of thumb is that if you think you're caregiving, you probably are. The University of Connecticut professor and author has a new book that just been released In Sickness and in Health, where an urgent argument is made that America’s caregiving crisis is not a private family matter, but a structural and political failure.  Mauldin isn't just a scholar in the field. She also speaks from personal experience about the impact of caregiving -- as well as how society views and values it -- on both caregivers and those that they care for. It may not have been the birthday present then 32-year-old Laura Mauldin wanted to buy herself, but purchasing long-term care insurance was something she knew she needed. Mauldin, an associate professor in UConn’s Department of Social and Critical Inquiry, had been caring for her sick partner the five years prior, watching as cancer destroyed the promise of a long life. “It’s not about being morbid, rather it’s about recognizing the inevitability of a completely typical, expectable part of life,” Mauldin says of her advanced planning. “Why not just go ahead and in a neutral way have a plan? Then it’s there, you don’t have to worry, and you can feel more prepared.” A detailed account of her caregiving experience is the launching point for her new book, “In Sickness and in Health,” released this month by HarperCollins’ Ecco Press, in which she tells the story of a handful of couples from around the country who she came to know over years of spending time with them, oftentimes days and nights. “I grew to love these people and to care about them,” she says. “Their stories tell us something bigger about our culture, about our society, and about our choices around care policy and care systems. Theirs are the hidden stories that are going on behind millions of closed doors.” In her quest to bring discussions about caregiving to the light of day, Mauldin sat with UConn Today recently to talk about the different forms that caregiving can take, the result of absent social safety nets, and how ableism permeates the culture. February 2026 - UConn Today Drawing from her new book, Mauldin blends her personal experience with sociological research to show how love, marriage, and devotion are routinely forced to compensate for weak public policy, limited Medicaid support, and a culture shaped by ableism. Her work reframes caregiving as essential labor, deeply gendered, largely invisible, and profoundly political, and challenges the notion that “love is enough” in a system that offers far too little support. It’s an old adage: when people get married, they promise to stick together “in sickness and in health.” But that’s easier said than done when you’re caregiving for a spouse or long-term partner, when systemic failures often lead to burnout. In her new book, In Sickness and in Health: Love Stories from the Front Lines of America’s Caregiving Crisis, University of Connecticut professor Laura Mauldin explores the relationships between caregivers and their disabled and sick spouses, and the underlying lack of structural support in the US that makes unpaid care an inescapable feature of most such relationships. The topic is personal for her: Maudlin’s partner’s leukemia came out of remission as they were getting closer in 2006. “Falling in love with J had called upon me to increasingly fill a role that required meeting nearly every one of her needs,” Mauldin writes in her introduction. “This was more than just providing emotional support when the person you love is suffering.” J passed away in 2010. I spoke to Mauldin about crafting this book based on her lived experiences, how systems fail both disabled people and their caregivers, and what is at stake with Medicaid cuts exacerbating the damage to an already broken system. February 2026 - Mother Jones Dr. Laura Mauldin, an associate professor in the Department of Social and Critical Inquiry at the University of Connecticut, blends rigorous scholarship with lived experience to challenge prevailing assumptions about caregiving, disability, and public policy. Her work exposes how cultural norms and policy gaps intersect to offload care onto private homes, obscuring the true costs of care and the human toll of under-resourced support systems. She is available to speak with media - simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.

New study shows alarming rate of potential species extinction due to climate change featured image

3 min

New study shows alarming rate of potential species extinction due to climate change

A recent study authored by the University of Connecticut's Mark Urban found that close to one third of species across the globe would be at risk of extinction by the end of the century if greenhouse gases continue to increase at current levels. His study, published in the journal Science, looked at more than three decades of biodiversity and climate change research. The findings are alarming. The study found that if global temperatures rise to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 degrees Celsius) above the pre-industrial average temperature, exceeding the target of the Paris Agreement, extinctions would rapidly accelerate — especially for amphibians; species in mountain, island and freshwater ecosystems; and species in South America, Australia and New Zealand. Earth has already warmed about 1.8 F (1 C) since the Industrial Revolution. Climate change causes shifts in temperatures and precipitation patterns, altering habitats and species interactions. For instance, warmer temperatures have caused monarch butterfly migration to mismatch with the blooming of plants they pollinate. Many animal and plant species are shifting their ranges to higher latitudes or elevations to follow more favorable temperatures. While some species might adapt or migrate in response to changing environmental conditions, some can't survive the drastic environmental changes, resulting in population declines and sometimes extinction. Global assessments have predicted rising extinction risks for over a million species, but scientists have not clearly understood how exactly this growing risk is linked to climate change. The new study, published Thursday (Dec. 5) in the journal Science, analyzed over 30 years of biodiversity and climate change research, encompassing over 450 studies of most known species. If greenhouse gas emissions are managed in accordance with the Paris Agreement, nearly 1 in 50 species worldwide — an estimated 180,000 species — will be at risk of extinction by 2100. When the climate model's temperature is increased to a 4.9 F (2.7 C) rise, which is predicted under current international emissions commitments, 1 in 20 species around the world would be at risk of extinction. Hypothetical warming beyond this point makes the number of species at risk rise sharply: 14.9% of species were at risk of extinction under a 7.7 F (4.3 C) warming scenario, which assumes high greenhouse gas emissions. And 29.7% of all species would be at risk of extinction under a 9.7 F (5.4 C) warming scenario, a high estimate, but one that is possible given current emissions trends. The increase in the number of species at risk increases steeply beyond the 1.5 C warming target, study author Mark Urban, a biologist at the University of Connecticut told Live Science. "If we keep global warming to below 1.5 C, in accordance with the Paris Agreement, then the [extinction] risk from today to 1.5 C is not a large increase," Urban said. But at a 2.7 C rise, the trajectory accelerates. Species in South America, Australia and New Zealand face the greatest threats. Amphibians are the most threatened because amphibians' life cycles depend heavily on weather, and are highly sensitive to shifting rainfall patterns and drought, Urban said. Mountain, island and freshwater ecosystems have the most at-risk species, likely because these isolated environments are surrounded by inhospitable habitats for their species, making it difficult or impossible for them to migrate and seek more favorable climates, he added. Limiting greenhouse gas emissions can slow warming and halt these growing extinction risks, but understanding which species and ecosystems are most affected by climate change can also help target conservation efforts where they're needed most. Urban hopes the results have an impact on policymakers. "The main message for policymakers is that this relationship is much more certain," Urban said. "There's no longer the excuse to do nothing because these impacts are uncertain."  December 5, 2024 - Live Science This is an important topic, and if you're a journalist looking to learn more, we can help. Mark Urban is an international award-winning scientist; a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology and the Arden Chair Ecology & Evolutionary Biology at UConn; and a global expert on climate change impacts on nature. He is available to speak with media - simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.

View all posts
Powered by