Hi all,
I’m a longtime Mozilla supporter, and I really value the organization’s commitment to openness, transparency, and user-first principles. That’s why I was surpris… (Lesen Sie mehr)
Hi all,
I’m a longtime Mozilla supporter, and I really value the organization’s commitment to openness, transparency, and user-first principles. That’s why I was surprised to see that Mozilla continues to partner with AccuWeather, and I wanted to open a respectful conversation about it.
AccuWeather’s CEO, Barry Myers, has a long and well-documented history of lobbying for the privatization of weather data. Under his leadership, AccuWeather pushed for legislation like the National Weather Service Duties Act, which would have prevented the National Weather Service (NWS) from offering public forecasts if private companies like AccuWeather were already doing so. Critics including meteorologists and open-data advocates warned that this would effectively limit public access to life-saving weather information.
Myers was later nominated to head NOAA during the Trump administration, despite his deep ties to AccuWeather and multiple ethics concerns. To make matters worse, in the present day, we’re seeing reports that NOAA is being actively dismantled from within—through budget cuts, leadership changes, and political pressure that favor privatization. These efforts echo the same ideology AccuWeather has historically supported: turning essential, public-facing weather data into a for-profit model. This is especially alarming in a time of increasing climate instability, where equitable access to accurate forecasting should be a public right, not a premium service.
Given Mozilla’s dedication to transparency, public interest, and open access to information, I’m genuinely curious how this partnership with AccuWeather aligns with those values. Has this relationship been re-evaluated recently? Or are there specific factors that Mozilla considers when forming or continuing partnerships with companies whose practices may not reflect Mozilla’s core mission?
This isn’t meant to be combative—I really do want to understand the reasoning behind this decision, and whether the Mozilla community has discussed these concerns internally. I’d also welcome thoughts from other community members who may have more insight.
Thanks for reading.
