How old-fashioned American greed has made the COVID-19 crisis even worse

 April 27, 2020 By Bob Hennelly, Salon - Commentary


The corporate news media has defined the coronavirus pandemic as merely a public health crisis. It is that, of course — but it has exposed a political crisis, too, that is making the effects of the pandemic far worse than they would be if this were merely a public health issue.

We can’t cure what ails us until we figure out the disease that afflicts us. And so far, when it comes to COVID-19, the empirical science has been a moving target wrapped up in qualifications and hedges.

If A is true and B is true, all we really know is scientists are still on a scavenger hunt for clues. So, for now, your scientific take on this crisis is like a veritable Rorschach test that reflects your own fears and hopes about what you want to be true.

Back to their normal

The powers-that-be guiding our post-mortem debate frame it around whether or not we need universal testing “so we can all get back to work.” Of course, this resumption of our economy will be crafted so as to maintain the same oppressive wealth pyramid that made us so vulnerable to the coronavirus in the first place. But with the desired testing protocols in place, the lower strata can worry their status as an essential worker preordains a premature demise like coal miners.

Take a look at a map of where America’s wealth inequality is most pronounced and then overlay the data from the COVID19 death toll. You will see the pandemic’s path through the America so many in Washington ignored for decades as they tilted the economy to favor the one percent.

Crucial to the corporatist continuity is the deliberate undercount of the dead bodies and the promotion of an image of managerial competence of a government to deliver us from a virus they ignored and then spread by fumbling their response.

Get on with it

The push to reopen without universal testing and contract tracing is coming from 21st century Malthusians, who — as their team captain in the White House has said —want to just let the virus “rip” through society. This crew doesn’t want to waste any more time, because for them time is money. They argue waiting to re-open the economy until there is universal testing and contract tracing will kill more people than COVID-19 itself.

They believe from their private box seats that a mass die-off of the most vulnerable —most likely blue-state urban-dwelling Democrats or undocumented immigrants, they hope — would be an interim solution and a solid down payment on herd immunity and the establishment of the 21st century post-COVID-19 master race.

Just think of how long they could put off really taxing the rich if the weakest in society were no longer of anyone’s earthly concern. And, as for the undocumented, they shouldn’t have been here in the first place; and COVID-19 has the no-knock warrant that Stephen Miller wanted ICE to have.

Remember, these are the same folks that put immigrant children in cages. They have made very clear that they do not see undocumented immigrants as human beings and that in their world informed by scarcity there’s barely enough to go around for American citizens.

And that was before Trump’s Great Depression. You don’t think Miller doesn’t want to step up his game to help insulate Trump’s base in the red states who are now feeling the COVID-19 heat in meatpacking plants that employed so many immigrants?

Why, for him it would be the restoration of the white America he and his boss always promised. Get rid of the immigrants first; then, thanks to the Depression 2.0, you will have red blooded Americans lining up for those same jobs they once thought beneath them.



Culling the herd

This white supremacist worldview was bluntly called out by David Frum, a former speech writer for George W. Bush, when he appeared on MSNBC with Ari Melber on April 24.

Frum observed that ProPublica had published a list of seven basic action items, like contact tracing, that should be in place before re-opening the economy. Yet, Frum rightly observed none of these public health prerequisites were in place even as Georgia Governor Brian Kemp, a Republican, moved to re-open the Peach Tree state’s economy.

This, Frum explained was moving “toward the policy” of “let’s take the punch” and reopen accepting ‘that there may be hundreds of thousands, or some double hundreds of thousands, of Americans killed. They’re going to be mostly poor and minorities, mostly not going to be Trump voters. Let’s take that punch and push through and try to get to herd immunity as fast as possible.”



Jello science

Of course, what this grand plan ignores is that it assumes that once a person has become infected with the virus, experiences a bout with it, and survives, they will be immune from contracting the virus again.

Yet, there have been cases of an individual surviving COVID 19, only to get re-infected.

NHK, Japan’s public broadcaster, reported on the vexing case of a woman, in her 40s, working as a tour bus guide with tourists from Wuhan, China, in January. She had tested positive for the coronavirus on January 29 and was declared cured on February 6.

Later in the month, she started to suffer symptoms and came up coronavirus-positive a second time.


This was not a one-off instance.

There were sufficient enough cases like this for South Korea’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (KCDC) to posit the recurrence of the virus in patients was evidence the virus could be “reactivated.”

And if there is not global scientific consensus on if you can get re-infected, there certainly is no empirical understanding of how long such an as-of-yet-unconfirmed immunity might last.

For want of a mask…

In the fog of the viral war, commentators have lost sight of how a decades-long bi-partisan embrace of militarism against the “axis of evil” set the stage for the scarcity of basic health care equipment and the broad deterioration of public health that makes the United States such a ripe host for the coronavirus.

Early on, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) issued guidance which greatly eroded the occupational health protections for front line health care workers because it required them to re-use N95 masks that were supposed to be disposed of after each clinical encounter.

This guidance was issued not because COVID-19 was any less infectious or deadly, but because the agency was worried there was not enough N95 masks to go around.



Scarcity.

And just as the nurses’ unions predicted the CDC “crisis” guidance was followed by healthcare workers getting sick, in some cases dying, as the virus continued to eat its way through the oldest, poorest and most vulnerable we have so long neglected.

ProPublica reported physicians and nurses “from New Jersey to California to North and South Carolina” all confirmed that hospital administrators had “normalized poor infection control practices — putting them at risk and likely spreading the virus.”

As a consequence, the non-profit news source said clinicians felt conditions were “so unsafe” they were “forced to choose between their livelihoods and risking their lives” and as a result were in some instances just “walking away.”

On April 17, the CDC released a study that looked at confirmed cases of COVID-19 and found that between Feb. 12 and April 9 9,282 health care workers had been infected, with 92 percent reporting at least one symptom like fever, cough, or shortness of breath. The remaining 8 percent did not report any of these symptoms.

While most health care workers tracked in the national study were not hospitalized, the CDC reported “severe outcomes, including 27 deaths occurred across all age groups” proving most lethal to older health care workers.

On April 20, the New York State Nurses Association (NYSNA) sued the New York State’s Health Department and two hospitals for allegedly failing to protect workers against the coronavirus by not providing sufficient personal protective equipment (PPE) and ordering them to work prematurely after being sick with the virus.

“More than seven in 10 of our nurses are reporting exposure to COVID-19, and most are still untested. These lawsuits were filed to protect our nurses, our patients and our communities from grossly inadequate and negligent protections,” NYSNA Executive Director Pat Kane said. “We cannot allow these dangerous practices to continue.”

According to Crystal Lewis’s reporting in the Chief-Leader, the NYSNA reported that 954 of their members tested positive for the coronavirus, and 8 have died.

A slide years in the making

As more and more health care professional succumbed to the virus, it burrowed even deeper into our nation’s poorest minority neighborhoods — the same ones that had been left to rust after the Great Recession.

While experts argue over how to account for the dead bodies and what it should say on the tens of thousands of death certificates, you can be sure we won’t see a reference to our society’s two most enduring pre-existing conditions: greed and scarcity.

If anybody in a position of real power had bothered to notice, they would have seen just how vulnerable we were — with the average life expectancy in the U.S. on the decline for three years in a row.

Ironically, the last time that happened was back around the time of the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic Woodrow Wilson did his best to ignore.

Work won’t set you free

Have no fear: our 21st century essential workers, we will memorialize you in gauzy commercials with swelling sentimental music as an audio underbed as we guarantee your right to a mask a week.

You will do your patriotic part, as did your slave and indentured servant ancestors before you. With selfless zeal you will ensure that the ruling class can remain safely ensconced in their home bunker and run the world remotely — for it is your destiny to serve, and they love you for it.

Trump using coronavirus stimulus to ‘enrich corporate executives’ while showing ‘complete disregard’ for workers: top unions

April 28, 2020 By Jake Johnson, Common Dreams

Leaders of some of the largest labor unions in the United States are warning that the Trump administration is brushing aside the interests of workers in its distribution of trillions of dollars in coronavirus bailout funds and instead using the taxpayer money to further enrich wealthy corporate executives.

As funds authorized by the multi-trillion-dollar CARES Act begin to fly out the door, the unions wrote in letters (pdf) to Democratic leaders Monday that they “are troubled that important worker protections are not being required of recipients.”


“Specifically, we are alarmed that the Federal Reserve’s lending facility for large businesses does not require those companies to maintain workers on payroll, while the program for mid-sized businesses fails to include anti-outsourcing provisions or any provisions protecting workers’ right to organize,” the unions wrote. “This means that, rather than protect good, family-supporting jobs as you intended, the funds can be used to enrich corporate executives and shareholders without regard for workers.”

The unions sent the letters to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio.). The letters’ signatories include Dan Mauer of the Communications Workers of America, Tor Cowan of the American Federation of Teachers, and John Gray of the Service Employees International Union.

The CARES Act, which President Donald Trump signed into law last month, contains some restrictions on corporate recipients of federal bailout funds—including limits on layoffs, stock buybacks, and executive compensation—but the law also empowers Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin to waive those restrictions, effectively rendering them meaningless.

“We were happy to see that one of the provisions of the CARES Act required that most employers receiving taxpayer funds would be required to keep 90% of their employees on payroll,” the unions wrote Monday. “Unfortunately the Trump administration and the Federal Reserve effectively waived any requirement to maintain workforces at companies receiving aid.”

“The Treasury Department, meanwhile, has failed to follow guidance under the CARES Act protections for airline payrolls, potentially risking good jobs in those sectors, as well,” the unions said.


The unions’ warnings came as progressives continue to raise alarm about how the trillions of dollars in corporate bailout funds are being utilized, particularly given that the limited oversight mechanisms established by the CARES Act are not yet fully functional.

The Federal Reserve has committed to making public the names of companies that receive bailout money, but the central bank has not said it will release the terms and conditions of the taxpayer loans.

The unions demanded Monday that Democratic lawmakers work to guarantee that any future stimulus package contains enforceable restrictions to protect workers and prevent profiteering by corporate executives.


“We urge you to ensure that any future legislation responding to the pandemic and the economic fallout includes not only robust worker protection provisions, but that those provisions are binding and enforceable on recipients of federal taxpayer assistance, without the loopholes in the CARES Act that the Trump administration has exploited to undermine them already,” the labor leaders wrote.

“We cannot yet again have the federal government bailing out corporations and major employers and leaving workers with no meaningful protections,” they added.




Read the full letter to Schumer and Brown:

On behalf of our millions of members, thank you for the leadership that you have shown during these extraordinarily challenging times as our country battles the COVID-19 pandemic. We especially want to thank you for your efforts to prioritize workers and worker protections during the drafting of the CARES Act and your continued efforts to provide help to the millions of workers across the U.S. who are suffering from this pandemic and the economic fallout.
Unfortunately, as the implementation of the legislation is carried out, and funds are beginning to flow to various employers and corporate entities, we are troubled that important worker protections are not being required of recipients. Specifically, we are alarmed that the Federal Reserve’s lending facility for large businesses does not require those companies to maintain workers on payroll, while the program for mid-sized businesses fails to include anti-outsourcing provisions or any provisions protecting workers’ right to organize. This means that, rather than protect good, family-supporting jobs as you intended, the funds can be used to enrich corporate executives and shareholders without regard for workers.
We know that you share our belief that the most important step that Congress can take is to ensure that federal taxpayer funds are used first and foremost to keep employees on payroll. Ensuring that workers keep their jobs and the economic certainty those jobs provide is critical to blunting the impact of the economic fallout from this pandemic on the overall U.S. economy. That is exactly why we were happy to see that one of the provisions of the CARES Act required that most employers receiving taxpayer funds would be required to keep 90% of their employees on payroll. Unfortunately the Trump Administration and the Federal Reserve effectively waived any requirement to maintain workforces at companies receiving aid. The Treasury Department, meanwhile, has failed to follow guidance under the CARES Act protections for airline payrolls, potentially risking good jobs in those sectors, as well.
Meanwhile, the importance of workers being able to form a union and have a voice in their workplaces has been made abundantly clear during this pandemic. The protections provided by union contracts and the ability of unionized workers to speak out on the job without fear of employer retribution allow millions of front line essential workers to shape workplace policies that not only protect their health and safety on the job during this pandemic, but the general public as well. Moreover, union contracts also provide important protections for workers unable to work during the crisis. The CARES Act could be used to require mid-sized employers receiving taxpayer funding in response to the pandemic to remain neutral when their employees choose to exercise their legal rights to organize into a union. Again, the Trump Administration and the Federal Reserve are apparently choosing not to make any requirements related to neutrality in union organizing efforts.
Given the extraordinary nature of the support that the federal government is providing for the private sector through the CARES Act, the intent of the CARES Act to protect good jobs as a condition of receiving aid were a completely reasonable effort to ensure that taxpayers money is used well. We have been highly disappointed that the Trump Administration has, once again, shown complete disregard for the well-being of working families and failed to implement any requirements that would benefit workers.
As powerful voices and leaders in the U.S. Senate for working families, we urge you to take steps to ensure that the worker protection provisions are actually imposed on recipients of federal aid in response to the current pandemic. In addition, we urge you to ensure that any future legislation responding to the pandemic and the economic fallout includes not only robust worker protection provisions, but that those provisions are binding and enforceable on recipients of federal taxpayer assistance, without the loopholes in the CARES Act that the Trump Administration has exploited to undermine them already. We cannot yet again have the federal government bailing out corporations and major employers and leaving workers with no meaningful protections.
Thank you again for your leadership in working to incorporate worker protections into the CARES Act and thank you in advance for working with us to ensure that those protections become reality for working families across the country going forward.

GOP senator under FBI investigation has long record of trading stocks in health companies he oversees: report
PRIVATE FOR PROFIT HEALTHCARE

April 27, 2020 By Pro Publica


In his 15 years in the Senate, Richard Burr, a North Carolina Republican, has been one of the health care industry’s staunchest friends.

Serving on the health care and finance committees, Burr advocated to end the tax on medical device makers, one of the industry’s most-detested aspects of the 2010 Affordable Care Act. He pushed the Food and Drug Administration to speed up its approval process. As one of the most prominent Republican health care policy thinkers, he has sponsored or co-sponsored dozens of health-related bills, including a proposal to replace “Obamacare.” He oversaw the implementation of major legislation to pump taxpayer money into private sector initiatives to address public health threats. “The industry feels very positive about Sen. Burr,” the president of North Carolina’s bioscience trade group said during Burr’s last reelection campaign. “He’s done a stellar job.”

Burr also trades in and out of the industry’s stocks.

Since 2013, Burr and his wife bought and sold between $639,500 and $1.1 million of stock in companies that make medical devices, equipment, supplies and drugs, according to a ProPublica analysis of his financial disclosures.

With weak laws and little oversight, such trading rarely trips any wires. There is no evidence Burr has acted illegally or violated Senate rules.

Senators are prohibited from pushing legislation in order to directly further their own financial interest, but they can own stocks in industries overseen by committees on which they sit and trade in and out of individual stocks.

Senators are prohibited from using inside information gleaned from their legislative work when trading, but that’s almost impossible to define and prove. No member of Congress has been charged because of the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act, or the STOCK Act, which explicitly banned the use of inside information, since it was passed in 2012.

Burr is also one of the Senate’s biggest beneficiaries of the industry’s largesse. Medical companies, trade groups and their executives and lobbyists regularly donate to his political committees. He’s received $1.5 million in donations from the pharmaceutical and medical product industries since his first election in 1994, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Burr’s representatives declined to comment for this story.

Burr’s financial interests have come under scrutiny in recent weeks. ProPublica reported he unloaded a significant portion of his stock holdings soon before the market crashed because of coronavirus fears, prompting an FBI investigation and calls for his resignation. Since then, ProPublica also has reported on Burr’s timely sale of his shares of an obscure fertilizer company and his townhouse sale to a donor and powerful lobbyist who had business before Burr’s committees. Burr has defended his recent stock sell-off, saying he relied solely on public information, including CNBC reports, to inform his trades and did not rely on information he obtained as a senator. He has also defended the townhouse sale, saying it was fair market value.

Sometimes Burr’s financial interests and official business overlap. In March 2017, as Congress prepared to reauthorize the FDA’s authority to take fees from drug companies and medical device makers to fund the approval process for new products, Burr took a strong pro-industry stance. During a hearing before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, Burr grilled FDA officials about whether they were diverting funds to unrelated projects and suggested they return some of the money to companies.

Among the corporations lobbying the Senate on that legislation was Philips, a Dutch firm that produces medical devices including ultrasound scanners, catheters, patient monitors and ventilators. At the end of 2016, Burr and his wife owned $45,518 worth of the company’s stock. Later that year, with the legislation still pending, they also bought $57,802 worth of Zimmer Biomet, an Indiana-based orthopedic device maker.

Even though such financial ties are broadly permitted, ethics experts advise lawmakers to avoid the appearance of a conflict that arises when they trade individual stocks, particularly those that are directly relevant to their legislative portfolios. Bills have been introduced in both chambers to ban the practice outright.

Tyler Gellasch, a former Senate staffer who helped draft the STOCK Act, said that trading of individual stocks by lawmakers should be banned and that trades of broader mutual funds and exchange traded funds should require clearance by ethics officials.

“Every single day, members of Congress and their staffs learn a ton of information, both public and non-public. And it’s generally impossible for any member of Congress to even know what information they obtain as a part of their jobs is material nonpublic information versus how much is public information,” he said. “It’s rare that they’re told that the information they have is material nonpublic information.”

Gellasch points out that financial services professionals and corporate executives often have their trading restricted, and lawmakers should too.

“These folks are making billion-dollar decisions every single day,” he said. “They receive material nonpublic information, but they also create it. The reason they have all this information is because they can change the outcomes.”

A letter to an agency, a comment at a hearing, a press release, a bill proposal or a vote could all move markets, Gellasch said, immediately or even months down the line.

While trading health care-related stocks, Burr has also developed close political ties with the industry. During his last reelection campaign in 2016, lobbyists for drugmaker AbbVie and Johnson & Johnson invited donors to mingle with Burr at an event at an Italian trattoria. Burr has owned shares of both companies.

As a lawmaker from North Carolina — home to dozens of companies that develop medical devices and pharmaceuticals — it’s not surprising that Burr would advocate for the health care industry. But there are multiple instances in which his financial interests have overlapped with his official actions.

In January 2015, Burr joined a bipartisan group of senators in proposing legislation to kill the tax on medical devices. “Repealing this job-killing medical device tax will help ensure America remains the world leader in the research and development of life-saving medical products,” Burr said, one of several efforts he backed to permanently end the tax, which was repealed in 2019.

Financial disclosures show that as of the end of 2014, Burr and his wife owned a combined 1,000 shares of Abbott Laboratories worth approximately $41,800. The Illinois-based medical device maker, a Burr donor, was lobbying to end the tax.

Last October, Burr again took a stance that aligned with Philips’ interests. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services was considering whether to change how the giant government run health care program would reimburse providers for radiation treatments on cancer patients. CMS wanted to experiment with moving from multiple per-treatment payments to one bundled sum, no matter how many treatments were provided, which would have saved taxpayers $260 million over a five-year period, according to a CMS estimate.

Philips, which sells a range of equipment used in radiation treatments, wrote to CMS to ask for a delay in the payment model experiment, and to express concerns with the low reimbursement rates. A week later, Burr and another senator wrote a similar letter to CMS echoing some of the company’s concerns: “We believe that the current proposal does not fully balance the incentive to participate with the decrease in payment rate, potentially jeopardizing the availability of radiation therapy for seniors.”

In recent weeks, Philips has become the target of congressional scrutiny for taking millions in tax dollars to develop affordable ventilators to be stockpiled for use during a pandemic. Instead the company produced none for the government and sold ventilators for a much higher price overseas.

The government office responsible for the Philips contract was the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority — the creation of which was one of Burr’s top legislative achievements in 2006 as part of a major bill he authored to address public health threats including bioterrorism and pandemics. The office, part of the Department of Health and Human Services, has been compared to a venture capital firm. A key aspect of the bill was to dole out grants to private companies working on products to address public health threats and help them through the regulatory process. In recent weeks, it has been examining private industry proposals for respirators, ventilators, tests, vaccines and therapeutics to COVID-19.

Though Burr has continued to advocate for BARDA over the years, there is no evidence Burr had any role in Philips’ ventilator contract.

Unlike with his stock sales ahead of the market crash on coronavirus fears, Burr’s previous stock moves have yielded mixed results. He sold shares of Zimmer Biomet, in January 2019, before the stock began a steep climb, ending the year up 50%. Other trades proved more timely: Burr bought shares of AbbVie in June 2019 on the day the company announced plans to acquire fellow drugmaker Allergan, a move that was initially unpopular with investors but preceded a rise in the company’s stock price.

It’s unclear how much of his portfolio still includes health care stocks because Burr has not yet reported his total assets for 2020.

In recent years, a number of lawmakers have come under fire for trading stocks relevant to their legislative agendas. Most notably, Tom Price, President Donald Trump’s first pick to lead HHS, was criticized during his confirmation hearings for trading more than $300,000 of shares in health companies over a four-year period while working on health care legislation in the House.

Burr came to his defense, asserting that Price’s critics in Congress “currently buy and sell and trade assets” just as Price had done.

“Does it burn you,” Burr asked Price during the hearing, “that they want to hold you to a different standard, now that you’re a nominee, than they are as a member?"

---30---

Extreme weather disasters and wars displace millions

Forced from their homes by floods, storms and wars, millions of internally displaced people are now at risk of a pandemic.

Extreme weather displaced 24 million people within their countries in 2019, with conflict and other disasters driving a further 9.5 million from their homes, according to a report published Tuesday by the Internal Displacement Monitoring Center (IDMC).

Floods and storms — particularly cyclones, typhoons and hurricanes — displaced 10 million and 13 million people respectively, with wildfires, droughts, landslides and temperature extremes contributing to another 900,000 displacements. About one million people fled volcanoes and earthquakes.

The figures are a reminder that displacement uproots millions of lives each year and that "too little is done to find solutions," the report's authors wrote. Some who flee or are evacuated later return to their homes, but the total number of displaced people has grown over years to its highest-ever level. About 51 million live displaced — many in crowded camps with poor sanitation.

Now they have a pandemic to deal with.

Large numbers of internally displaced people live in conditions where the spread of the coronavirus is going to be all the easier, said IDMC director Alexandra Bilak.

"How do you tell people to stay at home when their homes have been destroyed by disaster?"

Clean water is scarce in many displacement camps

Extreme weather is growing more intense as the planet heats up

Global crises like climate change, forced migration and the coronavirus feed off each other in unexpected ways. They create "perfect storms where people are hit way harder," said Maarten Van Aalst, director of the Climate Center at the Red Cross and Red Crescent.

Physical distancing rules to contain the virus, for instance, could leave school gymnasiums and church halls less able to shelter storm victims and prevent governments from packing people onto busses and driving them from danger. For people forced into camps or displaced in slums, there is not enough soapy water to keep disease at bay.

Taken together, the impact of several crises is bigger than the sum of each of the shocks separately, said Van Aalst, adding that many displaced people do not have financial or food buffers to survive through the next disaster.

When the shocks are of a different nature, "people feel they're getting hit from all sides."

Threatened by volcanoes, landslides, floods and typhoons, the Philippines is one of the world's most disaster-prone countries

Locust swarms that followed unusually heavy rains across East Africa have worsened an existing food security crisis

Fuelled by climate

In countries like Nigeria, South Sudan and Yemen, people first pushed out by violence were later struck by drought and floods, the report details, while in countries around the Lake Chad basin, like Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger, rising temperatures and dwindling access to water have fueled existing conflicts. This has driven displacement as militants lay siege to villages, burn homes and commit widespread human rights violations, the report says.

Climate change increases the intensity and frequency of some extreme weather events and this is displacing large numbers of people, said Patricia Schwerdtle, a global health academic at Heidelberg University researching climate, migration and health.

"People have always moved due to environmental change but climate change is acting as a threat amplifier."

Jakarta is sinking as the land subsides and sea levels rise, making floods more destructive

Record-breaking temperatures in the US and Australia, for instance, exacerbated dry ground conditions that allowed wildfires to spread. In East Africa, warmer oceans made cyclones stronger and may have contributed to them striking one after the other.

"What used to be rare is not rare anymore," said Abubakr Salih Babiker, a Sudanese climate scientist at the Intergovernmental Authority on Development.

But the figures also spell good news: Most displacements from disasters in 2019 were pre-emptive evacuations to protect citizens. While the disasters were still destructive, evacuations allowed people to return to homes — if they were standing — without large loss of life.

Last year, when Cyclones Fani and Bulbul struck south Asia, and Typhoons Lekima and Kammuri hit East Asia, early-warning systems allowed India, Bangladesh, China and the Philippines to move millions of people out of danger, the report says. These actions put death tolls lower than in Southern Africa, where a lack of early-warning systems meant Cyclones Idai and Kenneth displaced fewer people but killed more.

"These are governments that have measures and systems in place to anticipate the arrival of a hazard and evacuate their populations," said IDMC director Bilak. "A mandatory evacuation is actually a way of saving lives."


Early-warning systems and coastal defences reduced the death toll from Typhoon Lekima

'Tip of the iceberg'
The numbers compiled by the IDMC refer solely to people who flee within their country, and not refugees, who cross borders. Most of those forced from their homes by climatic changes stay in their own country, said Schwerdtle. It can be years, if not decades, before some get to go back.

Of the 5.1 million people living in displacement from disasters — which the authors describe as "just the tip of the iceberg" — there are 1.2 million Afghans who fled drought and floods over the last few years, 33,000 Haitians still displaced from an earthquake that struck in 2010, and a small number of Japanese resettled after the Fukushima disaster in 2011.

"Those people who remain displaced over a long period of time tend to be those who were already vulnerable before the disaster struck," said Bilak, adding that even in rich countries the poor are disproportionately hurt.

The slums of megacities like Lagos are particularly vulnerable to the coronavirus
Some seek refuge in camps, while others move to city slums to find work. In a sprawling megacity like Lagos, Nigeria, where more than half of residents live in informal settlements, cramped living quarters could make slums hotbeds of disease.

Many internally displaced people have been forced into already overcrowded areas by coronavirus lockdowns, said Rebecca Roberts, a researcher from Lagos who studies self-help strategies among internally displaced people in cities.

"We're particularly desperate that it doesn't get into the slums, because the conditions they live in would [create] an absolute crisis if Covid-19 penetrated."



MOZAMBIQUE: PICKING UP THE PIECES AFTER CYCLONE IDAI
Saving the family

Beatriz was able to save herself and her children from the floods. On March 15, 2019, the rising waters took the residents of Grudja village by suprise. For three days they took refuge on rooftops or clung to trees while they waited for the water levels to drop.

12345678910


Date 28.04.2020
Author Ajit Niranjan
Related Subjects Climate Change, Refugees, Asia, Migration, Extreme weather, Coronavirus
Keywords internally displaced people, climate change, extreme weather, coronavirus, migration, refugees, conflict, sub-Saharan Africa, Asia
Feedback: Send us your feedback.
Print Print this page
Permalink https://p.dw.com/

Conspiracy theories and fake news: Fighting the Covid-19 ‘infodemic’

Issued on: 26/04/2020

US President Donald Trump at one of his daily White House news briefings. © Mandel Ngan, AFP

Text by:Tamar SHILOH VIDON

Disinformation and conspiracy theories surrounding the global coronavirus pandemic have flooded the internet – often with an additional nudge from world leaders and celebrities – presenting a challenge for health authorities, social media platforms, journalists, fact-checkers and concerned citizens worldwide.

US health officials scrambled this week to put out a fire started by President Donald Trump when he suggested in his Thursday press briefing that injecting disinfectant might be worth studying for the treatment of Covid-19.

As worried Americans called hotlines to request more information, doctors and health experts reacted strongly, warning people against trying such dangerous homemade remedies.

Disinformation is a scourge of our era that tends to piggyback on any crisis, particularly a global one like the current pandemic: From conspiracy theories about how it began (in a Chinese or American lab?) and how it spreads (boosted by 5G networks?), to fake news about the reappearance of seldom viewed animals in ports and canals, to bogus remedies (some deadlier than the disease itself), the internet is awash with it.

“We’re not just fighting an epidemic; we’re fighting an infodemic,” World Health Organization (WHO) Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus warned in February.

The WHO defines an infodemic as “an over-abundance of information, some accurate and some not, that makes it hard for people to find trustworthy sources and reliable guidance when they need it”.

Top-down spread

The current infodemic has been worsened by the global scale of the health crisis and by the contributions of social media influencers and even some world leaders.

According to a study by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism and the Oxford Internet Institute entitled, Types, claims and sources of Covid-19 misinformation, “false information spread by politicians, celebrities, and other prominent public figures” accounted for 69 percent of total engagement on social media, even though their claims made up just 20 percent of those included in the study’s sample.

With 78.4 million followers on Twitter and a TV audience that sometimes surpasses 10 million viewers for his daily briefings, Trump is one of the world’s leading global influencers.

In his briefing at the White House on Thursday, Trump suggested that strong sunlight or UV light could be used to treat Covid-19. He then went on to muse about the potential benefits of disinfectant as a treatment.

“I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute – one minute,” Trump said of the virus. “And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning?” he asked.

Health officials worldwide reacted strongly, warning people not to ingest disinfectant.

“It is unfortunate that I have to comment on this, but people should under no circumstances ingest or inject bleach or disinfectant,” Patrice Harris, president of the American Medical Association, said in a statement Friday. “Rest assured when we eventually find a treatment for or vaccine against Covid-19, it will not be in the cleaning supplies aisle.”

Reckitt Benckiser, the manufacturer of the disinfectant Lysol, wrote on its website: “As a global leader in health and hygiene products, we must be clear that under no circumstance should our disinfectant products be administered into the human body (through injection, ingestion, or any other route).”

The White House said on Friday that Trump was being sarcastic in his disinfectant comments and blamed the media for taking his words out of context.

“Leave it to the media to irresponsibly take President Trump out of context and run with negative headlines,” White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said in a statement.

But it wasn’t the first time Trump made unsubstantiated remarks about possible treatments for the virus. In March, Trump announced in a news briefing that the anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine was being fast-tracked for approval by the FDA.

“Now, a drug called chloroquine – and some people would add to it ‘hydroxy’ – Hydroxychloroquine. So chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine. Now, this is a common malaria drug ... It’s shown very encouraging – very, very encouraging early results. And we’re going to be able to make that drug available almost immediately. And that’s where the FDA (US Food and Drug Administration) has been so great. They – they’ve gone through the approval process; it’s been approved. And they did it – they took it down from many, many months to immediate,” Trump said.

Days later, a man in the US state of Arizona died after he and his wife ingested chloroquine phosphate, used for treating parasites in fish. The man’s wife told NBC News they took it after she’d watched televised briefings during which President Trump talked about the potential benefits of chloroquine.

On April 24, the FDA strongly warned against using the prescription hydroxychloroquine, or chloroquine, for treating the virus outside of hospitals or clinical trials due to the risk of heart rhythm problems.

Social media steps up

Social media platforms, often hesitant to take decisive action against political disinformation and fake news, have stepped up and are taking action.

On March 17, several leading technology companies and social media firms issued a joint statement committing to “helping millions of people stay connected while also jointly combating fraud and misinformation about the virus, elevating authoritative content on our platforms, and sharing critical updates in coordination with government healthcare agencies around the world”.


Joint Industry Statement from @Facebook, @google, @LinkedIn, @Microsoft, @reddit, @Twitter and @YouTube https://t.co/8H1XVFt2N0 pic.twitter.com/GGJdX7mFKb— Facebook Newsroom (@fbnewsroom) March 17, 2020

According to the Reuters Institute study, the platforms have indeed removed, or attached warnings to, social media posts flagged as false by independent fact-checkers.

But the response varied from company to company. “On Twitter, 59% of posts rated as false in our sample by fact-checkers remain up. On YouTube, 27% remain up, and on Facebook, 24% of false-rated content in our sample remains up without warning labels,” the study found.

Google announced that it was setting up a 24-hour incident-response team that removes misinformation from search results and from YouTube, and that it would send users seeking information about the coronavirus to the WHO website and to other official health agencies.

Among the measures taken was a decision in late March to remove posts shared by Brazil’s far-right President Jair Bolsonaro containing disinformation about the virus.

YouTube pulled two videos from Bolsonaro’s account and Facebook removed posts on its platform and on Instagram (which it owns) where Bolsonaro, like Trump, touted the benefits of the anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine in treating Covid-19.

Twitter earlier had also removed two tweets that included a video showing the Brazilian leader praising the drug and calling for an end to social distancing.

Bolsonaro has dismissed Covid-19 as a “fantasy” and a “small flu”, even as cases have been overwhelming hospitals, morgues and cemeteries across Latin America’s largest country. He recently also fired his health minister and joined protests in the capital Brasilia against shutdown measures imposed by governors.

Brazil's President Jair Bolsonaro marching with his supporters, in Brasilia, Brazil, on April 19, 2020, to protest against quarantine and social distancing measures amid the Covid-19 outbreak, © Ueslei Marcelino, Reuters

News media and fact-checkers
News media and fact-checking organisations have also been working to dispel fake news and keep the public informed with facts from doctors, scientists and internationally recognised institutions like the WHO.

The Reuters Institute study found that independent fact-checkers moved especially quickly to debunk false information about the pandemic, with the number of English-language fact-checks rising more than 900 percent between January and March.

“The growing willingness of some news media to call out falsehoods and lies from prominent politicians can perhaps help counter this (though it risks alienating their strongest supporters),” the report’s authors wrote.

And the decision by Twitter, Facebook and YouTube to remove Bolsonaro’s posts “was in our view an important moment in how platform companies handle the problem that a lot of misinformation comes from the top”, the report said.

A perceived threat to free speech

The concerted, aggressive effort by social media to limit the spread of harmful content about the virus has been welcomed by NGOs, fact-checking organisations and others. But the platforms are not promising that this effort will spill over into the battle against political misinformation.

In a recent interview with the New York Times, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said it was easier to differentiate between good and bad information in a medical crisis than in politics. WHO directives and clear-cut scientific data make it simpler to discern the fake from the true.

“When you’re dealing with a pandemic, a lot of the stuff we’re seeing just crossed the threshold,” Zuckerberg said. “So it’s easier to set policies that are a little more black and white and take a much harder line.”

Using the same tactics to fight political disinformation is more complex because of the concern for freedom of speech. And critics have already sounded the alarm, even over the recent measures taken to fight the spread of Covid-19 misinformation.

“Twitter says it will delete posts that ‘could lead to widespread panic, social unrest, or large-scale disorder’. That could be absolutely anything,” Dan Gainor, vice president of the conservative content analysis group Media Research Center, told Fox News.

“Will it delete posts that show China lied and tens of thousands of Americans died? Will it delete posts about protests? Or just protests Twitter disagrees with?” Gainor asked.

“Twitter has served as a newswire showing breaking news photos and video from around the world. Now Twitter wants to restrict that information,” he told the US network. “It’s a rule only a dictator could love.”

Since introducing our updated policies on March 18, we’ve removed over 2,230 Tweets containing misleading and potentially harmful content. Our automated systems have challenged more than 3.4 million accounts targeting manipulative discussions around COVID-19.— Twitter Safety (@TwitterSafety) April 22, 2020

Some governments have already been criticised for adopting measures against the spread of fake news during the epidemic that are seen as threatening free speech in the longer term.

Hungary passed a law in March giving sweeping powers to Prime Minister Viktor Orban that include heavy prison terms for publishers of “false information” about the virus or the government’s own measures, sparking new concerns for dwindling press freedoms in the country.

In Bulgaria, the government proposed a similarly controversial law, mandating prison terms for those spreading fake news about infectious diseases, AFP reported.

Algerian lawmakers also passed a law criminalising the broadcast of “fake news” deemed harmful to “public order and state security”, according to AFP. The law, opposed by protesters and rights activists, “criminalises ... the broadcast of fake news that seeks to undermine order and public security” as well as “state security and national unity”.

Tips from fact-checkers

Fact-checking organisations have not only stepped up their efforts to debunk disinformation, they are also providing educational programmes on news literacy and tips for citizens on how to identify fake news.

The International Fact Checking Network, a unit of the nonprofit Poynter Institute for Media Studies, set up a #CoronaVirusFacts alliance in January that has united more than 100 fact-checkers from around the world to publish, share and translate facts surrounding the new coronavirus. It shares a variety of Covid-19 resources, including fact-checking tools, tips for journalists, reports and newsletters.

Some suggestions to safeguard oneself against the infodemic include taking a deep breath before sharing the latest news about the virus – especially if it’s emotional or divisive; referring to the WHO website or your national health website to get acquainted with the facts (and misperceptions) about the disease; and, in general, trusting scientists over politicians.

One of the most common ways misinformation has been spread is through photos that were altered or presented out of context. The fact-checker First Draft offers a toolbox to help verify images. Vishvas News, an Indian fact-checking organisation, offers a guide to checking both images and videos.

Disinformation has been around for millennia and is not likely to stop spreading anytime soon. But the hope is that the measures being taken now (and tips from fact-checkers) could help people make better sense of the current infodemic.

And as the experts continue studying the coronavirus – its modes of transmission, infection and mortality rates – more reliable information will gradually eclipse the fictions, while scientists continue to test treatments and work on developing a vaccine.

 ###

Chernobyl fires still burning on anniversary of accident

Fires are still blazing near the site of the world's worst nuclear disaster. Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has visited firefighters trying to extinguish the flames, marking the 34th anniversary of the accident.

More than 1,000 firefighters were working on Sunday to contain wildfires in the radiation-contaminated Chernobyl exclusion zone in Ukraine. Sunday marks the 34-year anniversary of Chernobyl nuclear disaster.

"On this day we bow our heads to the blessed memory of those heroes who saved the future from the danger of radiation," President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, who visited the firefighters on Sunday, said in a statement to mark the anniversary.

He also expressed "deep respect" for the firefighters and others currently working in the zone to protect the lands from new disasters.

Firefighters have been fighting the forest fires since they broke out at the start of April. They have been raging largely around the sealed-off zone near the Chernobyl plant.

Read more: Chernobyl in Ukraine: Firefighters battling radioactive forest

Environmental experts feared the fires could stir up radioactive ash and potentially blow contaminated smoke to the capital, Kyiv — about 100 kilometers (62 miles) away from the power plant. But authorities have assured that radiation levels in the city are within an acceptable range.

On Sunday, firefighters were focusing on the "containment of two cells" of smoldering trees and brush, the State Emergency Service said in a statement.

Around 11.5 thousand hectares have been destroyed by the fires, said Zelenskiy in a tweet on Sunday. The damage was "terrible" he added.

The tweet was accompanied by a photograph of the president meeting a firefighter at the site while observing coronavirus hygiene protocol — they were pictured wearing masks and bumping fists rather than shaking hands.


Anniversary of a disaster

Chernobyl was the site of the world's worst nuclear disaster when the No. 4 reactor exploded on April 26, 1986. The explosion caused large quantities of radioactive material to disperse in the atmosphere. The cloud of radioactive dust was sent over much of Europe.

Radiation from the accident is still present in the 2,600-square-kilometer (1,000-square-mile) exclusion zone that was set up around the site.

Tens of thousands of people were forced to relocate in the wake of the disaster, and several people died. Fires in the zone are a regular occurrence.

Ukrainian authorities believe the current fires may have been deliberately lit.

kmm/aw (dpa, AP)



CHERNOBYL: THE PEOPLE WHO'VE STAYED
The contagious optimism of Baba Gania

Baba Gania (left) is 86 years old. She survived her husband who died a decade ago. For the past 25 years, Gania has taken care of her mentally disabled sister Sonya (right). "I am not afraid of radiation. I boil the mushrooms till all the radiation is gone!" she says proudly. Photographer Alina Rudya visited her several times over the past years: "She is the warmest and kindest person I know."

12345678910

Every evening, DW's editors send out a selection of the day's hard news and quality feature journalism. You can sign up to receive it directly here.

DW RECOMMENDS

Chernobyl: Ukraine crews extinguish forest fires in exclusion zone

Firefighters worked for 10 days to extinguish fires that broke out in the forest around the Chernobyl nuclear plant. Ukrainian officials say they've tracked down two men who are believed to be behind the blazes. (14.04.2020)

Chernobyl: Radioactive forest near nuclear plant catches fire

A fire has broken out in a Ukrainian forest within the thousand-square-mile exclusion zone of the abandoned nuclear power plant at Chernobyl. Two firefighting planes and a helicopter were deployed to the scene. (04.04.2020) 

AUDIOS AND VIDEOS ON THE TOPIC

Ukraine: Chernobyl as a tourist attraction

Belarus: Life in the Forbidden Zone

Date 26.04.2020
Related Subjects Ukraine, Chernobyl
Keywords Chernobyl, Ukraine, wildfires, fires
Feedback: Send us your feedback.
Print Print this page
Permalink https://p.dw.com/p/3bRmy

What's life really like for black people in Germany?

Blacks are Germany's most visible minority. But how they experience racism and discrimination remains largely unknown. The Afrozensus, or "Afro Census," wants to change that by asking about their experiences.



After grocery shopping at Arnimplatz in Berlin's Prenzlauer Berg district recently, I saw a scene that is not uncommon in the German capital. A man had passed out. And the cops were trying to move him from the pavement after what was probably a bad case of daytime drinking or drugs. As I walked by, I noticed the third policeman. He was black. I smiled slightly as I did a double take. Fortunately, he returned my smile, so it wasn't awkward. This was the first time I'd seen a black police officer in Berlin.

I see black people in many places in the German capital, but I rarely see them working in client-facing roles, in jobs that allow them to engage directly with the public. Their roles tend to be less visible — confined to restaurant kitchens or worse. "Why do bathroom attendants have to be African?" a good friend from Kenya, who also lives here, once asked me.

Read more: Racism in German football: Lots of progress made, but lots of work to do

That black people are overrepresented in menial jobs is an example of structural and institutional racism, says Poliana Baumgarten, a German Afro-Brazilian filmmaker whose work deals with racism and discrimination.

"It just shows there's not even a chance for black women to get jobs where they would experience some form of dignity," she adds.

Lack of data hampers anti-discrimination efforts

Racial discrimination has been rising in Germany. The absolute numbers of reported racist incidents have increased, and they are growing faster than other forms of discrimination, according to the country's Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency. There were nearly 20% more racist attacks in 2018 than in 2017, based on official crime statistics. However, the data that would allow the anti-discrimination agency to see just how racism affects specific groups of people is missing. Germany doesn't collect information on race and ethnicity.

That's a problem, says Daniel Gyamerah, an expert on anti-discrimination. He believes that the data needs to be more targeted to help fight discrimination against people of African descent.

"They are seen as blacks and experience racism against black people, but there's no research about that," he explains.

Daniel Gyamerah is chairman of Each One Teach One, an empowerment organization by People of African Descent and Division Lead at Citizen For Europe, one of the project partners of the Afrozensus

"Politicians look at numbers," he says, noting that more evidence of racism is needed to get policymakers to act.

More than 1 million people of African descent live in Germany, according to estimates. And anti-discrimination advocates want to better understand their lives and experiences of racism. Gyamerah came up with the idea that will now result in Germany's first Afrozensus. The survey could help shed light on what it's like to be black in Germany today.

"Our aim is not to differentiate blacks from other ethnicities or communities, it's to show that there are intersections," he says, noting how other social categories, such as gender or religion, can change how a black person experiences discrimination.

The Afrozensus, which is funded by the Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency, will collect standard demographic data — age, gender, disability — and discrimination experiences. It will also ask respondents about their economic participation, civic engagement and expectations from lawmakers.

"The data would allow us to broach the issue of discrimination in public discourse in Germany, because it becomes more visible," says agency spokesperson Sebastian Bickerich.


Legacy of the Third Reich

It's impossible to discuss racism in Germany without mentioning National Socialism. The effects of the Nazi period on German society still linger. And some experts attribute the country's inability to adequately tackle racism in public discourse today as a response to the understanding of race during the Third Reich.

There is an idea that "by acknowledging racial differences, you are promoting them," says Sarah Chander, a Brussels-based social justice advocate.

She believes politicians need to adopt an understanding that comes from anti-racist organizations to deal with discrimination.

"We need to recognize the social differences that you ascribe to us with race," says Chander, whose work has given her an overview of the problem across Europe. "We can't just hope that those differences won't exist if we don't talk about them."

Daniel Gyamerah would agree.

"Because of National Socialism and the unfathomable responsibility of the entire society, in relation to Nazism and what our forefathers did, it often means that the consequences of German colonialism are neglected," he says.


Thousands died in the genocide in German South West Africa — in concentration camps and from starvation

Gyamerah points to colonialism and National Socialism as elements of a "racist continuity." The first genocide in the 20th century is linked to Germany. Tens of thousands of Nama and Herero were killed in German South West Africa (now Namibia) after they rebelled against colonial rule. And while several German politicians have acknowledged the genocide, an official apology is still pending. Numerous streets in the country still bear the names of individuals many would consider mass murderers.

"The focus is on National Socialism because the collective responsibility there is so big that it's difficult for society to recognize other events in German history," says Gyamerah. "Colonialism and anti-black racism have no place in the country's public discourse."

Read more: Berlin confronts Germany's colonial past with new initiative
Is Germany changing how it talks about race?

Speaking at the country's integration summit last month, Chancellor Angela Merkel used the term schwarz (black) to question why people of African descent have to prove they are German even when they were born and raised here. This was the first time in years a high-ranking government official used the word. Some saw her statement, in the aftermath of the most recent racist attack in Hanau, as a direct reference to discrimination that targets blacks or other people of color.

"It's a huge relief that groups of people who are more likely to suffer discrimination are actually being named," says Maureen Maisha Auma, professor of childhood and diversity studies at the University of Magdeburg.

"For a long time, it was a taboo because [racism] was lumped together with xenophobia, which in a sense also places the blame on the person who is being discriminated against," she explains.

What is the African diaspora experience in Germany?

The German chancellor's recent viral sound bite gives more weight to the calls from scholars like Auma who have repeatedly spoken about anti-black racism.

"The way we see the world, because we navigate it in a black body, has started to take on a meaning [in Germany]," Auma says.

While Germans have recognized that racism is an issue, "they still have reservations about having certain groups of people in their proximity," according to Sebastian Bickerich. Examining how those reservations affect blacks in the country could begin with the Afrozensus, which will be launched in May in three languages — German, English and French. People can already sign up to receive the online survey. Its initiators want the results, which are slated for publication at the end of the year, to spur policymakers into action.

But for Germany's black population and people of color, it will be about more than just numbers. It will also be an opportunity to get insights into how to deal with discrimination, says Daniel Gyamerah.

DW RECOMMENDS


Germany 'must do more' to fight racism: Council of Europe

A European anti-racism commission has detected "high levels of Islamophobia" and said that public discourse in Germany is increasingly xenophobic. "Blatant" racism from certain quarters has impacted mainstream politics. (17.03.2020)

Date 25.04.2020
Author Chiponda Chimbelu
Related Subjects Discrimination, Human Rights, The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF)
Keywords racism, discrimination, human rights, social justice
Feedback: Send us your feedback.
Print Print this page
Permalink https://p.dw.com/p/3b3CN

'Pandemic populism': Germany sees rise in conspiracy theories

With the COVID-19 crisis sparking uncertainty, conspiracy theories are booming in Germany. Right-wing activists in particular are trying to stir up hatred against politicians and the democratic system, a new study warns.






The rumor starts with a true news story: Angela Merkel is gone.

On March 22, the German chancellor disappeared from public view. Her spokesman officially announced the move, saying: Angela Merkel must quarantine for 14 days as a precaution after her doctor became infected with COVID-19.

It was the top news story of the day in German media, but while established newspapers and television programs asked how the government would function with a chancellor working from home, right-wing conspiracy theorists began to whisper and speculate.

Andreas Albrecht Harlass, spokesman for the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) parliamentary party in the eastern state of Saxony, speculated that Merkel is not only gone — she will also never come back. The quarantine, he says, is just a pretext. Some of his followers claimed to know more details: the German chancellor is probably hiding in a bunker at her country estate in Paraguay, a property they claim she bought years ago.

The chancellor has since gone out of quarantine and very obviously wasn't in Paraguay. This fact hasn't impressed conspiracy theorists, with speculation continuing on a large scale.

Read more: Coronavirus and the plague: The disease of viral conspiracy theories


Despite claims from conspiracy theorists, Chancellor Angela Merkel obviously did not flee to Paraguay

The rise of 'pandemic populism'

Researchers at the University of Münster have been taking a closer look at how right-wing conspiracy theories work during the COVID-19 pandemic. From January to March this year, they examined around 120,000 Facebook posts from various German media outlets.

The result? Alongside the extensive coronavirus reporting by established newspapers and broadcasters, there was also a rise in the number of posts by so-called "alternative media" outlets, i.e. right-wing publications that want to deliberately dissociate themselves from established media and the political elite.

The interesting thing researchers found was that "alternative media" are also basically reporting on the same, verifiable facts — but they lace these reports with speculation, such as positing that the virus was produced in a laboratory or that it is less dangerous than reports would suggest.

"The alternative media spread their messages subtly in a seemingly harmless communication strategy. Obvious false reports do not fit in with this approach," says Thorsten Quandt, who headed the University of Münster's study. Populist tendencies were still found in the posts.

Scientists have dubbed this strategy "Pandemic populism." Conspiracy theorists mix the pandemic in with already-established topics — climate change, refugee issues, and doomsday fantasies lumped together with the coronavirus.

Anglea Merkel, climate activist Greta Thunberg, refugees and COVID-19 — in the end, everything is somehow connected to everything else.

Even if this "pandemic populism" only accounts for a fraction of all the coronavirus coverage, the "alternative media" have succeeded in building up their own frame of reference.

"We found several cases where their statements were picked up by others, for example on the YouTube channels of conspiracy theorists, which serve as a secondary distribution system. They label alternative news media messages as credible," Quandt says.

This enables them to make their own unsupported theories appear larger and more established than they factually are. Individual posts can also certainly keep up with the reach and interaction rates of large media platforms.

Read more: Facebook steps up fight against coronavirus misinformation


The right-wing outlet "Compact" makes targeted attacks on democracy

Deliberately destructive posts

Conspiracy theorists don't believe in coincidences. They claim there is a small group of elites pulling the strings behind the scenes, and that these elites are conspiring against the public, against everyday people. The fact that there are regular reports about abuse of power and misconduct by politicians and other powerful people plays into their hands.

Media outlets that spread such theories are anything but naive about what they're doing. Platforms like Russia Today Germany or the right-wing magazine Compact carry out targeted propaganda.

Simone Rafael from the Amadeu Antonio Foundation, which works to strengthen democratic civic society, notes that these outlets have a clear goal with their reporting.

"According to their own statements, 'alternative media' believe they are in an 'info-war' against democratic political parties and against parliamentary democracy. They spread uncertainty in order to overthrow the system," says Rafael.

There is no shortage of uncertainty right now. The pandemic scares people, particularly as they notice that even those in positions of political responsibility are struggling to find their way through the crisis.

For Susann Rüthrich, a member of parliament with the center-left Social Democrats, it is crucial to take this uncertainty seriously.

"We must discuss these decisions publicly and make them transparent. You have to play with open cards. That worked well in the first phase of the crisis. Now in the second phase, we must not stifle these debates," Rüthrich says.

The politician says she's noticed how the pressure mounts the longer people have to give up their well-established everyday lives. Even supporters of contact bans and stay-at-home orders are becoming more receptive to populist or conspiratorial content due to the prolonged uncertainty.

Read more: Conspiracies are 'always theories of power'

COVID-19 crisis: Fake news spills over into real world

Pop stars spreading theories

Conspiracy theorists are particularly grateful for the boost they receive from celebrities who take part in speculating about theories.

In Germany, famous musician Xavier Naidoo recently made headlines for a video he posted, wherein he tearfully posits that the outbreak is the start of a worldwide liberation campaign.

In his video, Naidoo claims that US President Donald Trump imposed coronavirus curfews and sent a large Navy hospital ship to New York in order to secretly free masses of abducted and abused children being held in underground tunnel systems.

For Naidoo, there was a simple and plausible reason why more isn't known about the operation: it is secret. Thanks to the celebrity status of a musician like Naidoo, such stories manage to exit conspiracy circles and manage to spill into mainstream audiences.

Read more: Coronavirus in Iran: A case of misinformation, conspiracy theories and propaganda


Bundestag Vice-President Petra Pau warns that local politicians could be targeted

Threat of violence

How dangerous are conspiracy theories for society? In the University of Münster study, researchers concluded that the spread of conspiracy theories poses a real threat.

"Alternative media can contribute to public confusion by constructing a contradictory, threatening and suspicious world view that questions every 'official' statement," communication scientist Thorsten Quandt writes in the study.

Experts have observed, with concern, that conspiracy theories are an important building block in the world view of violent right-wing criminals.

"Especially among conspiracy theory supporters, we encounter a closed-off world view with a great desire to act. They see themselves as the only people who can stop the downfall," warns Rafael of the Amadeu Antonio Foundation.

The longer the coronavirus pandemic holds society in its grip, the more conspiracy theorists could become radicalized. Petra Pau, the vice president of the German parliament and a Left party lawmaker, shares this concern.

For her, the problem is not a virtual one, but rather a very real one. "Local politicians have been exposed in recent years to right-wing threats in particular. I see the potential for danger if local authorities are put under pressure from the coronavirus and cut certain services, that people will then look for culprits. The agitators could use that," Pau says.

The murder of center-right Christian Democrat regional politician Walter Lübcke last year shows how the danger needs to be taken seriously. A right-wing extremist shot him in 2019. The motive? Hatred for his pro-refugee policies.



CONSPIRACY THEORIES AND THEIR ORIGINS: FROM THE FREEMASONS TO THE TWIN TOWERS
9/11: Inside job?
Who was really behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks on New York? Was it the US government, meaning the Twin Towers were subject to a controlled explosion? Was it a Jewish conspiracy, with some claiming that Jews did not go to work in the World Trade Center that day? An exhibition titled "Conspiracy theories — then and now" at the Dalheim Monastery shows how such beliefs emerge and are maintained.

12345


Date 26.04.2020
Author Hans Pfeifer
Related Subjects Angela Merkel, CDU, Christian Democratic Union, Fake news, Donald Trump, Coronavirus
Keywords coronavirus, Angela Merkel, Donald Trump, fake news, misinformation
Feedback: Send us your feedback.
Print Print this page
Permalink https://p.dw.com/p/3bOAh

Mighty armies, underfunded health care systems

Opinion: Weapons don't fight pandemics

The COVID-19 pandemic shows that we've got our security priorities wrong. Virus outbreaks, after all, cannot be contained by military force. Time for a security rethink, says Miodrag Soric.

Keeping citizens safe is the greatest responsibility of any state. Citizens can only enjoy free, dignified lives when they are secure. And economic prosperity, too, depends on security being maintained for all. But that is easier said than done. The ongoing coronavirus pandemic shows how well or, indeed badly, different states are managing this outbreak. And, more importantly, how prepared they were for such a crisis.

Many officials say nobody could have seen it coming. But since 2003, we have witnessed the SARS, swine flu, MERS, Ebola and Zika virus outbreaks. Governments, in others words, had ample time to prepare for the possibility of a pandemic. But leaders in the Northern Hemisphere got their priorities wrong, investing billions in arms instead of readying emergency services for a potential disaster scenario.

Mighty armies, underfunded health care systems

Tanks, fighter planes and aircraft carriers — where many crew members have fallen ill with the coronavirus — are useless against a pandemic. The world's mightiest army simply will not keep us safe. On the contrary, increased defense spending has often led to states diverting money away from health care systems, infrastructure networks and environmental protection measures.

Miodrag Soric is one of DW's chief correspondents

It's a sentiment echoed by former US President and Army General Dwight D. Eisenhower, who in 1953, in the early days of the Cold War, said:

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children."

After the 9/11 attacks, the US beefed up its armed forces, waging war against radical Islamists abroad — both real and imagined. Now, in hindsight, the Twin Tower attacks may seem almost trivial compared to the scores dying from COVID-19 in the United States, let alone the rest of the world.

Just to be clear: Of course every country needs an army to protect its citizens from external attacks. And the US fleet, for example, plays a key role in securing global trade routes. But the US and other nations have failed to recognize the biggest threats to our safety: pandemics, climate change and environmental destruction.

Leaders have underestimated those threats and still do so now. Besides, the current pandemic may also precipitate food riots, especially in Africa and parts of Asia.

Isolationism, protectionism won't help
Once again, there are calls in the US to go down the road of isolationism, and stay clear of all the world's crises and wars. But viruses and climate change don't care for national borders. And protectionism also does little to help; it harms a nation's export industry, suppressing economic growth and ultimately forcing people into poverty. The ramifications could be far worse than the virus outbreak itself.

The pandemic we are facing has made abundantly clear just how globalized our world is today. Something happening in faraway countries can swiftly spread and affect people across the globe.

Globalization is here to stay. That means the global community must cooperate. And for this to work, rich countries in the global North, chiefly the US, must take leadership and show they have learned from past mistakes. Only then can our world become a safer place for all.

DW RECOMMENDS

How the German military is fighting coronavirus

The German military has had to show some flexibility to combat the coronavirus outbreak. The Bundeswehr is also increasingly being asked to protect civilians, as well as its own troops. (26.03.2020)

Date 26.04.2020
Author Miodrag Soric

SEE PERMANENT ARMS ECONOMY