newyorker--2020-02-28--In an Environment of Chronic Economic Uncertainty, Trump Is Only Making It Worse

The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped another 357.28 points on Friday , bringing its losses over the past six trading days to more than three thousand seven hundred points , or about thirteen per cent .
That ’ s a big move , to be sure , but it needs to be placed in perspective .
The market is now trading at roughly the level it was at a year ago .
Many of the gains since then have been based on wishful thinking and speculation , rather than rising corporate earnings .
As I pointed out a few days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was an accident waiting to happen .
Where will things go from here for the markets , the broader economy , and the U.S. polity ?
Anybody who makes firm predictions now is a fool or a knave .
With the worldwide spread of the coronavirus , we have entered a zone of chronic uncertainty—or what economists sometimes refer to as Knightian uncertainty , after Frank Knight , the noted Chicago economist of the early twentieth century .
In his book “ Risk , Uncertainty and Profit , ” from 1921 , Knight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , such as the chances of rolling two sixes or winning the lottery , and risks that are so complex and hard to decipher that they “ are not susceptible to measurement.
” That ’ s where we are now .
We still don ’ t have enough reliable information to form sensible judgments about where this thing is ultimately heading .
On Friday , the World Health Organization again stopped short of declaring a global pandemic .
“ What we see at the moment are linked epidemics of COVID-19 in several countries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ traced to known contacts or clusters of cases , ” Tedros Adhanom , the director general of the W.H.O.
, said at his daily briefing .
“ We do not see evidence as yet that the virus is spreading freely in communities .
As long as that ’ s the case , we still have a chance of containing this virus , if robust action is taken to detect cases early , isolate and care for patients , and trace contacts.
” In the United States , the number of confirmed cases is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not clear whether that ’ s simply because there hasn ’ t been much testing .
In California , the authorities are monitoring more than eight thousand people who recently travelled abroad , but , according to the governor , Gavin Newsom , the state has only two hundred testing kits .
On Friday , Mick Mulvaney , the White House chief of staff , acknowledged that the spread of the virus may lead to school closures and disruptions to public transportation , but he also accused the media of exaggerating the crisis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump .
Larry Kudlow , Trump ’ s top economic adviser , spoke with reporters and insisted that the U.S. economy would be fine .
“ I just don ’ t think this short-term stock-market correction is going to have any effect , ” he said .
Statements like these are counterproductive : they just further undermine the White House ’ s already tattered credibility .
( Earlier this week , Kudlow said , of the coronavirus , “ We have contained this .
.
.
.
It ’ s pretty close to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be honest about the uncertainties , avoid Panglossian predictions , and concentrate on public-health measures , such as supplying more testing kits and expanding health facilities in case there is a mass outbreak .
Regarding the economy , the White House should merely say that it will work with Congress and the Federal Reserve to maintain stability , and it should stop trying to talk up the stock market—a tactic that treats investors as idiots .
When people encounter Knightian uncertainty , they tend to hunker down and adopt an attitude of safety @ @ @ @ @ @ @ financial markets , this translates into selling risky assets such as stocks , raising cash , and buying safer assets , particularly government bonds .
On Friday , the interest yields on long-term U.S. Treasury bonds hit all-time lows—with thirty-year Treasury bonds dipping below 1.9 per cent—a textbook case of a flight to safety .
The hunkering down isn ’ t confined to the financial markets , of course .
Much of the vast Chinese economy , a key source of goods and components for other countries around the world , is still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , restrictions on travel and group events are being introduced , and not just by governments .
On Thursday , Facebook cancelled its annual developer conference , which was due to take place in early May ; on Friday , Amazon ordered its employees to defer all nonessential travel , including trips within the United States .
There is even talk of postponing this summer ’ s Olympic Games , which are scheduled to take place in Tokyo .
In assessing the economic impact of the virus , some analysts have interpreted the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ production—a “ supply shock.
” Thinking along these lines , a number of Wall Street forecasters have bravely predicted that economic growth , after taking a hit in the first part of this year , will rebound sharply .
This matches what happened after the shock of 9/11 , and it could happen again .
But there is another , darker narrative in which rising infection rates , falling stock prices , and the widespread adoption of emergency restrictions on international travel and internal movements combine to produce a substantial fall in spending @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” which then interacts with the supply shock to produce a deeper and more lasting downturn .
On Friday , the economics team at Goldman Sachs published a study that outlined three different scenarios , with economic outcomes that ranged from a rapid rebound to a global recession .
The analysts said that , for now , they were sticking with their intermediate , baseline view that there would be “ a short-lived global contraction that stops short of an outright recession.
” However , they added that they would be monitoring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including the monthly hard economic data , higher-frequency indicators on economic activity , financial conditions , medical statistics , and more anecdotal reports.
” At this stage , that is about all anybody can do .

The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped another 357.28 points on Friday, bringing its losses over the past six trading days to more than three thousand seven hundred points, or about thirteen per cent. That’s a big move, to be sure, but it needs to be placed in perspective. The market is now trading at roughly the level it was at a year ago. Many of the gains since then have been based on wishful thinking and speculation, rather than rising corporate earnings. As I pointed out a few days ago, the market’s dive was an accident waiting to happen.
Where will things go from here for the markets, the broader economy, and the U.S. polity? Anybody who makes firm predictions now is a fool or a knave. With the worldwide spread of the coronavirus, we have entered a zone of chronic uncertainty—or what economists sometimes refer to as Knightian uncertainty, after Frank Knight, the noted Chicago economist of the early twentieth century. In his book “Risk, Uncertainty and Profit,” from 1921, Knight distinguished between risks that can be calculated, such as the chances of rolling two sixes or winning the lottery, and risks that are so complex and hard to decipher that they “are not susceptible to measurement.” That’s where we are now. We still don’t have enough reliable information to form sensible judgments about where this thing is ultimately heading.
On Friday, the World Health Organization again stopped short of declaring a global pandemic. “What we see at the moment are linked epidemics of COVID-19 in several countries, but most cases can still be traced to known contacts or clusters of cases,” Tedros Adhanom, the director general of the W.H.O., said at his daily briefing. “We do not see evidence as yet that the virus is spreading freely in communities. As long as that’s the case, we still have a chance of containing this virus, if robust action is taken to detect cases early, isolate and care for patients, and trace contacts.”
In the United States, the number of confirmed cases is still small, but it’s not clear whether that’s simply because there hasn’t been much testing. In California, the authorities are monitoring more than eight thousand people who recently travelled abroad, but, according to the governor, Gavin Newsom, the state has only two hundred testing kits. On Friday, Mick Mulvaney, the White House chief of staff, acknowledged that the spread of the virus may lead to school closures and disruptions to public transportation, but he also accused the media of exaggerating the crisis in an attempt to bring down Donald Trump. Larry Kudlow, Trump’s top economic adviser, spoke with reporters and insisted that the U.S. economy would be fine. “I just don’t think this short-term stock-market correction is going to have any effect,” he said.
Statements like these are counterproductive: they just further undermine the White House’s already tattered credibility. (Earlier this week, Kudlow said, of the coronavirus, “We have contained this. . . . It’s pretty close to airtight.”) A wiser Administration would be honest about the uncertainties, avoid Panglossian predictions, and concentrate on public-health measures, such as supplying more testing kits and expanding health facilities in case there is a mass outbreak. Regarding the economy, the White House should merely say that it will work with Congress and the Federal Reserve to maintain stability, and it should stop trying to talk up the stock market—a tactic that treats investors as idiots.
When people encounter Knightian uncertainty, they tend to hunker down and adopt an attitude of safety first—a perfectly rational reaction. In the financial markets, this translates into selling risky assets such as stocks, raising cash, and buying safer assets, particularly government bonds. On Friday, the interest yields on long-term U.S. Treasury bonds hit all-time lows—with thirty-year Treasury bonds dipping below 1.9 per cent—a textbook case of a flight to safety.
The hunkering down isn’t confined to the financial markets, of course. Much of the vast Chinese economy, a key source of goods and components for other countries around the world, is still on enforced hiatus. In many places, restrictions on travel and group events are being introduced, and not just by governments. On Thursday, Facebook cancelled its annual developer conference, which was due to take place in early May; on Friday, Amazon ordered its employees to defer all nonessential travel, including trips within the United States. There is even talk of postponing this summer’s Olympic Games, which are scheduled to take place in Tokyo.
In assessing the economic impact of the virus, some analysts have interpreted the market slide as a temporary shock to production—a “supply shock.” Thinking along these lines, a number of Wall Street forecasters have bravely predicted that economic growth, after taking a hit in the first part of this year, will rebound sharply. This matches what happened after the shock of 9/11, and it could happen again. But there is another, darker narrative in which rising infection rates, falling stock prices, and the widespread adoption of emergency restrictions on international travel and internal movements combine to produce a substantial fall in spending by consumers and businesses—a “demand shock,” which then interacts with the supply shock to produce a deeper and more lasting downturn.
On Friday, the economics team at Goldman Sachs published a study that outlined three different scenarios, with economic outcomes that ranged from a rapid rebound to a global recession. The analysts said that, for now, they were sticking with their intermediate, baseline view that there would be “a short-lived global contraction that stops short of an outright recession.” However, they added that they would be monitoring “a wide range of indicators, including the monthly hard economic data, higher-frequency indicators on economic activity, financial conditions, medical statistics, and more anecdotal reports.” At this stage, that is about all anybody can do.
A Guide to the Coronavirus
How much of the world is likely to be quarantined?
Donald Trump in the time of coronavirus.
The coronavirus is likely to spread for months, if not more than a year, before a vaccine could be widely available.
We are all irrational panic shoppers.
The strange terror of watching the coronavirus take Rome.
How pandemics change history.


newyorker--2020-02-28--Rose McGowan and Ronan Farrow on the Weinstein Verdict, and a Look at Candidate Bloomberg

Rose McGowan sat down for a conversation with Ronan Farrow after a Manhattan jury convicted Harvey Weinstein of two of @ @ @ @ @ charged with .
“ It ’ s been an odyssey for both of us , @ @ @ @ @ who first broke the Weinstein story in The New Yorker .
Eleanor Randolph , the @ @ @ @ @ and Andrea Bernstein , a WNYC reporter , talk about Blooomberg ’ s mayoral career @ @ @ @ @ we ’ ll look at how neuromarketing is narrowing the gap between politics and technology @ @ @ @ @ biographer of Michael Bloomberg , and Andrea Bernstein , a WNYC reporter who covered the @ @ @ @ @ in Gracie Mansion , analyze his approach to governing .
Hours after a Manhattan jury @ @ @ @ @ sex crimes , Ronan Farrow talked with the actress , one of Weinstein ’ s @ @ @ @ @ Peer Inside the Minds of Voters Using EEG sensors and heart-rate monitors , a company @ @ @ @ @ our attention and emotions .

Illustrated by Golden Cosmos
Rose McGowan sat down for a conversation with Ronan Farrow after a Manhattan jury convicted Harvey Weinstein of two of the sex crimes he was charged with. “It’s been an odyssey for both of us,” McGowan tells Farrow, who first broke the Weinstein story in The New Yorker. Eleanor Randolph, the biographer of Michael Bloomberg, and Andrea Bernstein, a WNYC reporter, talk about Blooomberg’s mayoral career and Presidential ambitions. And we’ll look at how neuromarketing is narrowing the gap between politics and technology.
President Mike?
Eleanor Randolph, a biographer of Michael Bloomberg, and Andrea Bernstein, a WNYC reporter who covered the former mayor’s terms in Gracie Mansion, analyze his approach to governing.
Rose McGowan on Harvey Weinstein’s Guilty Verdict
Hours after a Manhattan jury convicted the movie producer of sex crimes, Ronan Farrow talked with the actress, one of Weinstein’s accusers.
Neuromarketing Tries to Peer Inside the Minds of Voters
Using EEG sensors and heart-rate monitors, a company investigates how political candidates engage our attention and emotions.


newyorker--2020-02-28--The Faces of a New Union Movement

The Faces of a New Union Movement

Chris Haag graduated from Hampshire College in 2006 , and jumped headlong into the gig economy .
He played in a rock band , tried his luck as a filmmaker , and acted in several productions at the Public Theatre , in New York City .
He also helped to build sets for the Public , and with the skills he acquired there landed a job as a freelance art installer at MOMA PS1 , in Long Island City , in 2013 , where he still works today .
At PS1 , Haag , who is thirty-six , builds walls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ carpet , and installs video exhibitions .
The schedule is inconsistent : some weeks he ’ s assigned forty hours of work ; other weeks he ’ s assigned none .
But he relies on the job to make ends meet—he earns considerably less from his other current gig , as the drummer of a Brooklyn-based space-rock band called No FAN .
Several years ago , while working at an art fair , Haag had a realization .
“ The person setting up the walls for the fair is usually a union worker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he said .
At PS1 , Haag was paid only thirty dollars an hour .
“ What ’ s going on here ?
, ” he recalls thinking .
That discrepancy helped propel Haag and some forty other art installers and maintenance workers at PS1 to vote to unionize in 2015 .
At the time , some of Haag ’ s fellow art installers at the museum were making just eighteen dollars an hour ; the starting rate hadn ’ t risen in more than a decade .
“ There was no rhyme @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
Two women who were working there for thirteen years , mopping floors and cleaning toilets , earned just $ 11.25 hour , he said , adding , “ That was pretty despicable.
” Under PS1 ’ s union contract , minimum pay has climbed to twenty-three dollars an hour ; Haag ’ s hourly pay will increase to $ 40.09 in 2022 .
Haag is part of a wave of young workers who have been unionizing in sectors with little or no tradition of unions : art museums , including the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also tech companies , digital-media brands , political campaigns , even cannabis shops .
At Google , around ninety contract workers in Pittsburgh recently formed a union—a significant breakthrough , even if they represent just a tiny fraction of the company ’ s workforce .
More than thirty digital publications , including Vox , Vice , Salon , Slate , and HuffPost , have unionized .
( The editorial staff of The New Yorker unionized in 2018 . )
Last March , Bernie Sanders ’ s campaign became the first major-party Presidential campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the campaigns of Eric Swalwell , Julián Castro , and Elizabeth Warren unionized soon after .
At Grinnell College , in Iowa , students working in the school ’ s dining hall unionized in 2016 , becoming one of the nation ’ s only undergraduate-student labor unions .
Sam Xu , the union ’ s twenty-one-year-old former president , said , “ Mark Zuckerberg was running Facebook out of his dorm room .
I ’ m running a union out of my dorm room .
”

Chris Haag graduated from Hampshire College in 2006, and jumped headlong into the gig economy. He played in a rock band, tried his luck as a filmmaker, and acted in several productions at the Public Theatre, in New York City. He also helped to build sets for the Public, and with the skills he acquired there landed a job as a freelance art installer at MOMA PS1, in Long Island City, in 2013, where he still works today. At PS1, Haag, who is thirty-six, builds walls and pedestals, moves sculptures, lays carpet, and installs video exhibitions. The schedule is inconsistent: some weeks he’s assigned forty hours of work; other weeks he’s assigned none. But he relies on the job to make ends meet—he earns considerably less from his other current gig, as the drummer of a Brooklyn-based space-rock band called No FAN.
Several years ago, while working at an art fair, Haag had a realization. “The person setting up the walls for the fair is usually a union worker making sixty dollars an hour,” he said. At PS1, Haag was paid only thirty dollars an hour. “What’s going on here?,” he recalls thinking. That discrepancy helped propel Haag and some forty other art installers and maintenance workers at PS1 to vote to unionize in 2015. At the time, some of Haag’s fellow art installers at the museum were making just eighteen dollars an hour; the starting rate hadn’t risen in more than a decade. “There was no rhyme or reason to it,” he said. Two women who were working there for thirteen years, mopping floors and cleaning toilets, earned just $11.25 hour, he said, adding, “That was pretty despicable.” Under PS1’s union contract, minimum pay has climbed to twenty-three dollars an hour; Haag’s hourly pay will increase to $40.09 in 2022.
Haag is part of a wave of young workers who have been unionizing in sectors with little or no tradition of unions: art museums, including the Guggenheim and the New Museum, but also tech companies, digital-media brands, political campaigns, even cannabis shops. At Google, around ninety contract workers in Pittsburgh recently formed a union—a significant breakthrough, even if they represent just a tiny fraction of the company’s workforce. More than thirty digital publications, including Vox, Vice, Salon, Slate, and HuffPost, have unionized. (The editorial staff of The New Yorker unionized in 2018.) Last March, Bernie Sanders’s campaign became the first major-party Presidential campaign in history with a unionized workforce; the campaigns of Eric Swalwell, Julián Castro, and Elizabeth Warren unionized soon after. At Grinnell College, in Iowa, students working in the school’s dining hall unionized in 2016, becoming one of the nation’s only undergraduate-student labor unions. Sam Xu, the union’s twenty-one-year-old former president, said, “Mark Zuckerberg was running Facebook out of his dorm room. I’m running a union out of my dorm room.”


newyorker--2020-02-28--The Coronavirus and How Political Spin Has Worsened Epidemics

The virulent germ we now call the Spanish flu happened to strike at a diabolical moment in the history of politics and propaganda .
The previous spring , in April of 1917 , the United States entered the First World War , and President Woodrow Wilson launched a dubious campaign to shore up popular support and suppress criticism .
He established the Committee on Public Information , whose chairman , George Creel , set out to promote what he called “ propaganda in the true sense of the word , meaning the ‘ propagation of faith.
’ ” Wilson also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ disloyal , profane , scurrilous , or abusive language about the form of government ” or anything else that might impede the war effort .
The government put up posters around the country urging citizens to report anyone “ who spreads pessimistic stories.
” In early 1918 , the virus—which would eventually kill more people than all the military deaths of both World Wars combined—infected a large number of men at Camp Funston , an Army base in Kansas , and spread rapidly to other bases .
As it slipped into the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the war effort , for the propaganda machine that Wilson had created , ” John M. Barry writes , in his detailed history of the pandemic , “ The Great Influenza.
” A Navy ship carried the virus to Philadelphia , and sailors started dying , but the city ’ s public-health director , a political appointee named Wilmer Krusen , dismissed it as “ old-fashioned influenza or grip.
” As the toll grew , Krusen assured the public that the city was on track to “ nip the epidemic in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ became allies in maintaining the façade .
A headline in the Inquirer declared , “ Scientific Nursing Halting Epidemic , ” when , in fact , local hospitals were collapsing under a crush of new cases .
The week of that headline , forty-five hundred and ninety-seven people in Philadelphia died of the flu .
In New York and Los Angeles , officials gave similarly false assurances , until the reality became inescapable .
Cities and towns were running out of coffins .
The clergy started patrolling the streets with carts , Barry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bring out their dead .
Eventually , it was named the Spanish flu not because it originated in Spain but because when the king , Alfonso XIII , fell ill , the Spanish press was not bound by restrictions against reporting it .
Throughout history , diseases have posed an unsparing test of political leaders and their fidelity to the facts .
According to Howard Markel , a medical historian at the University of Michigan , “ From the political to the purely mercenary , secrecy has almost always contributed to the further @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health management.
” In 1892 , the German government hid , and thus exacerbated , a cholera epidemic out of fear that sealing the port of Hamburg would be an economic disaster .
In 1982 , as AIDS was increasingly identified among communities of gay men , the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention declared it an epidemic , but , when President Ronald Reagan ’ s spokesman , Larry Speakes , was asked to comment about it during press briefings , he made jokes .
( Reagan finally spoke publicly about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) This year , in the first months of the coronavirus epidemic , governments in multiple countries have tried to shape the truth in order to maintain control and deflect criticism .
In China , after Li Wenliang , a doctor in Wuhan , drew attention to the new disease , police criticized him for spreading “ rumors.
” When he died from the virus , the government censored online posts demanding free speech .
Even weeks after the virus emerged and started to spread , the local government in Wuhan ordered news @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an estimated five million people to leave the city before it was placed under quarantine , on January 22nd .
In Iran , the national government maintained as recently as Tuesday that only twelve people had died of the virus , even though a local health official from Qom had told reporters that , in his city alone , fifty people had died from it .
In a moment of cruel farce , on Monday , Iran ’ s deputy health minister , Iraj Harirchi , appeared on television to downplay the risks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his brow with a towel .
That evening , he learned that he had tested positive for the virus .
When the coronavirus reached the United States in earnest , this month , it became entangled , almost instantly , in political posturing and manipulation .
On Monday , Rush Limbaugh , on whom President Trump recently bestowed the Presidential Medal of Freedom , told his audience , “ It looks like the coronavirus is being weaponized as yet another element to bring down Donald Trump .
Now , I want to tell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
.
.
The coronavirus is the common cold , folks.
” On Tuesday , as stock markets collapsed around the world , Larry Kudlow , the White House National Economic Council director , told CNBC , “ We have contained this .
I won ’ t say airtight , but it ’ s pretty close to airtight.
” Investors were not reassured ; stock markets continued to fall , especially after Kudlow ’ s optimism was undercut by comments from Nancy Messonnier , the head of the National Center for Immunization and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prepare for a period of working remotely , teleschooling , and other measures to prevent the spread of the disease .
By midweek , the Administration was straining to rebut warnings from public-health experts .
Trump tweeted , “ Low Ratings Fake News MSDNC ( Comcast ) & @ CNN are doing everything possible to make the Caronavirus [ sic ] look as bad as possible , including panicking markets , if possible .
Likewise their incompetent Do Nothing Democrat comrades are all talk , no action .
USA in great shape !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ only from Democrats .
On Tuesday , when Chad Wolf , the acting Homeland Security Secretary , testified at a Senate budget hearing , he described the death rate from the coronavirus as similar to that of the flu , although , in fact , the coronavirus appears to be more lethal .
Senator John Kennedy , a Louisiana Republican , rebuked him .
“ You ’ re supposed to keep us safe , and the American people deserve some straight answers on the coronavirus , and I ’ m not getting them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Facing bipartisan criticism , the Administration asked Congress for an emergency $ 2.5 billion to fight the coronavirus .
The Administration is also under pressure to fill vacancies that it had created in the government institutions capable of handling such an emergency .
During the past two years , it cut the federal ranks of experts involved with infectious-disease emergencies .
In February of 2018 , the C.D.C .
announced plans to stop epidemic-prevention work in thirty-nine out of forty-nine countries that it was monitoring and supporting , leaving ten “ priority countries.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In May , 2018 , John Bolton , then the national-security adviser , disbanded the global-health-security team at the National Security Council .
Top officials left , and the posts were never refilled .
Chuck Schumer , the Senate Minority Leader , called on Trump to appoint a “ czar ” for the federal response— “ an independent , non-partisan , global-health expert , with real expertise.
” Instead , on Wednesday , Trump appointed the Vice-President , Mike Pence , to oversee the effort .
One of Pence ’ s first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was to “ tighten control of coronavirus messaging by government health officials and scientists , directing them to coordinate all statements and public appearances ” with his office .
Dr. Anthony Fauci , the respected director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases , who has advised six Presidents , told associates that the White House “ had instructed him not to say anything else without clearance , ” the Times said .
( A spokesperson for the Institute denied that report . )
In 2017 , approaching the hundredth anniversary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barry wrote that “ the most important lesson from 1918 is to tell the truth .
Though that idea is incorporated into every preparedness plan I know of , its actual implementation will depend on the character and leadership of the people in charge when a crisis erupts.
” By the end of February , as the virus reached farther into the United States , Trump was squaring off against an unfamiliar kind of problem , one that is largely immune to the willful disregard for the facts .
A germ is insensitive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a problem that can ’ t be fudged by scribbling with a Sharpie on a map .
How the Administration performs is likely to be a historic test of not only its capacity to function but also of the government ’ s resilience after three years of Trump ’ s leadership .
Regardless of political orientation , every American should be rooting for the Trump Administration to get this right .

The virulent germ we now call the Spanish flu happened to strike at a diabolical moment in the history of politics and propaganda. The previous spring, in April of 1917, the United States entered the First World War, and President Woodrow Wilson launched a dubious campaign to shore up popular support and suppress criticism. He established the Committee on Public Information, whose chairman, George Creel, set out to promote what he called “propaganda in the true sense of the word, meaning the ‘propagation of faith.’ ” Wilson also signed the Sedition Act, which criminalized “disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government” or anything else that might impede the war effort. The government put up posters around the country urging citizens to report anyone “who spreads pessimistic stories.”
In early 1918, the virus—which would eventually kill more people than all the military deaths of both World Wars combined—infected a large number of men at Camp Funston, an Army base in Kansas, and spread rapidly to other bases. As it slipped into the civilian world, public-health officials “lied for the war effort, for the propaganda machine that Wilson had created,” John M. Barry writes, in his detailed history of the pandemic, “The Great Influenza.” A Navy ship carried the virus to Philadelphia, and sailors started dying, but the city’s public-health director, a political appointee named Wilmer Krusen, dismissed it as “old-fashioned influenza or grip.” As the toll grew, Krusen assured the public that the city was on track to “nip the epidemic in the bud,” and some news organizations became allies in maintaining the façade. A headline in the Inquirer declared, “Scientific Nursing Halting Epidemic,” when, in fact, local hospitals were collapsing under a crush of new cases. The week of that headline, forty-five hundred and ninety-seven people in Philadelphia died of the flu.
In New York and Los Angeles, officials gave similarly false assurances, until the reality became inescapable. Cities and towns were running out of coffins. The clergy started patrolling the streets with carts, Barry writes, calling on the public to bring out their dead. Eventually, it was named the Spanish flu not because it originated in Spain but because when the king, Alfonso XIII, fell ill, the Spanish press was not bound by restrictions against reporting it.
Throughout history, diseases have posed an unsparing test of political leaders and their fidelity to the facts. According to Howard Markel, a medical historian at the University of Michigan, “From the political to the purely mercenary, secrecy has almost always contributed to the further spread of a pandemic and hindered public health management.” In 1892, the German government hid, and thus exacerbated, a cholera epidemic out of fear that sealing the port of Hamburg would be an economic disaster. In 1982, as AIDS was increasingly identified among communities of gay men, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention declared it an epidemic, but, when President Ronald Reagan’s spokesman, Larry Speakes, was asked to comment about it during press briefings, he made jokes. (Reagan finally spoke publicly about the disease in September of 1985.)
This year, in the first months of the coronavirus epidemic, governments in multiple countries have tried to shape the truth in order to maintain control and deflect criticism. In China, after Li Wenliang, a doctor in Wuhan, drew attention to the new disease, police criticized him for spreading “rumors.” When he died from the virus, the government censored online posts demanding free speech. Even weeks after the virus emerged and started to spread, the local government in Wuhan ordered news organizations to suppress the information and allowed an estimated five million people to leave the city before it was placed under quarantine, on January 22nd.
In Iran, the national government maintained as recently as Tuesday that only twelve people had died of the virus, even though a local health official from Qom had told reporters that, in his city alone, fifty people had died from it. In a moment of cruel farce, on Monday, Iran’s deputy health minister, Iraj Harirchi, appeared on television to downplay the risks, even as he coughed and wiped his brow with a towel. That evening, he learned that he had tested positive for the virus.
When the coronavirus reached the United States in earnest, this month, it became entangled, almost instantly, in political posturing and manipulation. On Monday, Rush Limbaugh, on whom President Trump recently bestowed the Presidential Medal of Freedom, told his audience, “It looks like the coronavirus is being weaponized as yet another element to bring down Donald Trump. Now, I want to tell you the truth about the coronavirus. . . . The coronavirus is the common cold, folks.” On Tuesday, as stock markets collapsed around the world, Larry Kudlow, the White House National Economic Council director, told CNBC, “We have contained this. I won’t say airtight, but it’s pretty close to airtight.” Investors were not reassured; stock markets continued to fall, especially after Kudlow’s optimism was undercut by comments from Nancy Messonnier, the head of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, who warned Americans to prepare for a period of working remotely, teleschooling, and other measures to prevent the spread of the disease.
By midweek, the Administration was straining to rebut warnings from public-health experts. Trump tweeted, “Low Ratings Fake News MSDNC (Comcast) & @CNN are doing everything possible to make the Caronavirus [sic] look as bad as possible, including panicking markets, if possible. Likewise their incompetent Do Nothing Democrat comrades are all talk, no action. USA in great shape!” But the concern was coming not only from Democrats. On Tuesday, when Chad Wolf, the acting Homeland Security Secretary, testified at a Senate budget hearing, he described the death rate from the coronavirus as similar to that of the flu, although, in fact, the coronavirus appears to be more lethal. Senator John Kennedy, a Louisiana Republican, rebuked him. “You’re supposed to keep us safe, and the American people deserve some straight answers on the coronavirus, and I’m not getting them from you,” Kennedy said. Facing bipartisan criticism, the Administration asked Congress for an emergency $2.5 billion to fight the coronavirus.
The Administration is also under pressure to fill vacancies that it had created in the government institutions capable of handling such an emergency. During the past two years, it cut the federal ranks of experts involved with infectious-disease emergencies. In February of 2018, the C.D.C. announced plans to stop epidemic-prevention work in thirty-nine out of forty-nine countries that it was monitoring and supporting, leaving ten “priority countries.” China was not one of them. In May, 2018, John Bolton, then the national-security adviser, disbanded the global-health-security team at the National Security Council. Top officials left, and the posts were never refilled.
Chuck Schumer, the Senate Minority Leader, called on Trump to appoint a “czar” for the federal response—“an independent, non-partisan, global-health expert, with real expertise.” Instead, on Wednesday, Trump appointed the Vice-President, Mike Pence, to oversee the effort. One of Pence’s first moves, according to the Times, was to “tighten control of coronavirus messaging by government health officials and scientists, directing them to coordinate all statements and public appearances” with his office. Dr. Anthony Fauci, the respected director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, who has advised six Presidents, told associates that the White House “had instructed him not to say anything else without clearance,” the Times said. (A spokesperson for the Institute denied that report.)
In 2017, approaching the hundredth anniversary of the Spanish-flu pandemic, John M. Barry wrote that “the most important lesson from 1918 is to tell the truth. Though that idea is incorporated into every preparedness plan I know of, its actual implementation will depend on the character and leadership of the people in charge when a crisis erupts.” By the end of February, as the virus reached farther into the United States, Trump was squaring off against an unfamiliar kind of problem, one that is largely immune to the willful disregard for the facts. A germ is insensitive to the powers of spin. It is a problem that can’t be fudged by scribbling with a Sharpie on a map. How the Administration performs is likely to be a historic test of not only its capacity to function but also of the government’s resilience after three years of Trump’s leadership. Regardless of political orientation, every American should be rooting for the Trump Administration to get this right.
A Guide to the Coronavirus
How much of the world is likely to be quarantined?
Donald Trump in the time of coronavirus.
The coronavirus is likely to spread for months, if not more than a year, before a vaccine could be widely available.
We are all irrational panic shoppers.
The strange terror of watching the coronavirus take Rome.
How pandemics change history.


newyorker--2020-02-28--On AMC’s “Dispatches from Elsewhere,” Jason Segel Plays with Convoluted Ways of Telling Straight Sto

On AMC’s “Dispatches from Elsewhere,” Jason Segel Plays with Convoluted Ways of Telling Straight Stories

In 2008 , Jeff Hull , an artist working in and around San Francisco , founded the Jejune Institute .
In the course of three years , the Institute—an imaginary thing at the center of an elaborate alternate-reality game—inducted several thousand members .
Players unravelled a plot concerning the imaginary founder of the Jejune Institute , its organized dissidents , and the whereabouts of a charmed young woman with the aura of a benevolent rebel princess .
Spencer McCall ’ s 2013 documentary about the project , “ The Institute , ” suggests that it combined a Fluxus stunt , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ self-help workshop , interactive promenade theatre , and some traditional hipster bullshit .
On AMC ’ s “ Dispatches from Elsewhere , ” the series creator , Jason Segel , turns the art piece into a distinctive fiction .
In a version of Philadelphia , the Jejune Institute is a real thing , although the nature of what is real is a subject of some fun .
Its universe is absurd but graced by wonderment , as if the central characters have joined a flash mob that may yet jostle them off to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Elsewhere ” on “ The Institute ” in somewhat the same sense that Charlie Kaufman and his brother based “ Adaptation ” on “ The Orchid Thief.
” Bigfoot has a recurring cameo , and his hair is perfect .
“ Dispatches ” recalls Kaufman ’ s work in its melancholic metaphysical gist , its vigorous metafictional form , its attention to loneliness , and its invention of far-fetched technologies rigged up from charming analog gizmos .
( The “ induction videos ” that Hull created for the Jejune Institute , re-created @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Betamax sensibility with the training films of LesterCorp , from “ Being John Malkovich.
” ) In building its own voice , the show thieves profitably from several schools of self-conscious yarn-spinning as it toys with oblique approaches to straight stories , with a rigor that counters its bits of squishy whimsy .
Richard E. Grant is Octavio Coleman , the narrator and the founder of the Institute , who is something like an alluring cult leader or personal-development-seminar overlord .
His business is “ socio-reëngineering , ” and the Institute describes itself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ techniques utilized to expand interpersonal trust.
” Coleman introduces us to Peter , played by Segel , who is lonely and numb , living on packaged sushi , in a state of quiet desperation ; his apartment , decorated in shades of waiting-room green , is host to a domestic life out of an Edward Hopper painting .
“ Squint your eyes and Peter is you , ” Coleman says , in one of many open appeals to the empathetic imagination .
“ Dispatches ” at first appears to want you to identify @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your sense of curiosity ; but then it warps its own perspective by having this narrator , with his plush diction , undermine his reliability early on .
Segel and his collaborators have a serious determination to play around .
When Peter sees a man taping a “ Have you seen this man ?
” flyer to a lamppost , he realizes that the guy on the flyer is the same guy taping the flyer up ; he flees .
Peter calls the relevant phone number , and the Jejune Institute invites him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and self-actualization .
He swiftly discovers a found family of teammates for an arcane lark : Janice ( Sally Field ) , a pleasant old lady with a bedridden husband ; Fredwynn ( André Benjamin ) , a STEM prodigy grown into an isolated retired rich guy ; Simone ( Eve Lindley ) , a sprightly young trans woman who is menaced by thugs on the street and nagged by feelings of displacement .
( Coleman ’ s request to imagine oneself as Simone hits as pleasantly didactic . )
Each of these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trip , and the series sometimes unfolds as a collection of linked character studies , or a cycle of prose poems .
“ Dispatches ” advances in lyrical loops , circling each character ’ s psychology with animated bits and surrealistic riffs .
The big picture of the elevated scavenger hunt is mostly a plot-generation machine .
Its bright threads of silliness ( a sequence in which , perhaps in a nod to “ The Sopranos , ” Peter and Simone receive instruction from a Big Mouth Billy Bass-like fish ) lead to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ introverted Peter summoning the nerve to express affection for Simone and getting stung by her emotional unavailability ) .
I don ’ t dare guess what the vignettes add up to , other than a show so lyrical with dream logic that it ’ s intriguing even when it ’ s not strictly successful .
AMC has a soft spot for the vibes and devices of classic American postmodern fiction ; “ Lodge 49 ” put in two excellent seasons of homage to Thomas Pynchon , and now “ Dispatches ” is doing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reflexivity and self-revision and exploratory parody of its storytelling .
I started wondering if Segel , on some level , behind the scenes , is still in character as David Foster Wallace from “ The End of the Tour.
” Then I caught an obstructed view , on Fredwynn ’ s meaningfully curated bookshelf , of the spine of “ Infinite Jest .
”

In 2008, Jeff Hull, an artist working in and around San Francisco, founded the Jejune Institute. In the course of three years, the Institute—an imaginary thing at the center of an elaborate alternate-reality game—inducted several thousand members. Players unravelled a plot concerning the imaginary founder of the Jejune Institute, its organized dissidents, and the whereabouts of a charmed young woman with the aura of a benevolent rebel princess. Spencer McCall’s 2013 documentary about the project, “The Institute,” suggests that it combined a Fluxus stunt, a freelance crowd-psychology experiment, a ludic self-help workshop, interactive promenade theatre, and some traditional hipster bullshit.
On AMC’s “Dispatches from Elsewhere,” the series creator, Jason Segel, turns the art piece into a distinctive fiction. In a version of Philadelphia, the Jejune Institute is a real thing, although the nature of what is real is a subject of some fun. Its universe is absurd but graced by wonderment, as if the central characters have joined a flash mob that may yet jostle them off to Oz. Segel has based “Dispatches from Elsewhere” on “The Institute” in somewhat the same sense that Charlie Kaufman and his brother based “Adaptation” on “The Orchid Thief.” Bigfoot has a recurring cameo, and his hair is perfect.
“Dispatches” recalls Kaufman’s work in its melancholic metaphysical gist, its vigorous metafictional form, its attention to loneliness, and its invention of far-fetched technologies rigged up from charming analog gizmos. (The “induction videos” that Hull created for the Jejune Institute, re-created here, share their deadpan manner and Betamax sensibility with the training films of LesterCorp, from “Being John Malkovich.”) In building its own voice, the show thieves profitably from several schools of self-conscious yarn-spinning as it toys with oblique approaches to straight stories, with a rigor that counters its bits of squishy whimsy.
Richard E. Grant is Octavio Coleman, the narrator and the founder of the Institute, who is something like an alluring cult leader or personal-development-seminar overlord. His business is “socio-reëngineering,” and the Institute describes itself as a “forum for experimental research techniques utilized to expand interpersonal trust.” Coleman introduces us to Peter, played by Segel, who is lonely and numb, living on packaged sushi, in a state of quiet desperation; his apartment, decorated in shades of waiting-room green, is host to a domestic life out of an Edward Hopper painting. “Squint your eyes and Peter is you,” Coleman says, in one of many open appeals to the empathetic imagination. “Dispatches” at first appears to want you to identify with its characters, which may enrich your sense of curiosity; but then it warps its own perspective by having this narrator, with his plush diction, undermine his reliability early on. Segel and his collaborators have a serious determination to play around.
When Peter sees a man taping a “Have you seen this man?” flyer to a lamppost, he realizes that the guy on the flyer is the same guy taping the flyer up; he flees. Peter calls the relevant phone number, and the Jejune Institute invites him in to receive touching promises of adventure and self-actualization. He swiftly discovers a found family of teammates for an arcane lark: Janice (Sally Field), a pleasant old lady with a bedridden husband; Fredwynn (André Benjamin), a STEM prodigy grown into an isolated retired rich guy; Simone (Eve Lindley), a sprightly young trans woman who is menaced by thugs on the street and nagged by feelings of displacement. (Coleman’s request to imagine oneself as Simone hits as pleasantly didactic.) Each of these people is on his or her own trip, and the series sometimes unfolds as a collection of linked character studies, or a cycle of prose poems. “Dispatches” advances in lyrical loops, circling each character’s psychology with animated bits and surrealistic riffs. The big picture of the elevated scavenger hunt is mostly a plot-generation machine. Its bright threads of silliness (a sequence in which, perhaps in a nod to “The Sopranos,” Peter and Simone receive instruction from a Big Mouth Billy Bass-like fish) lead to sincere vignettes (a scene of the introverted Peter summoning the nerve to express affection for Simone and getting stung by her emotional unavailability). I don’t dare guess what the vignettes add up to, other than a show so lyrical with dream logic that it’s intriguing even when it’s not strictly successful.
AMC has a soft spot for the vibes and devices of classic American postmodern fiction; “Lodge 49” put in two excellent seasons of homage to Thomas Pynchon, and now “Dispatches” is doing a John Barth thing, in the reflexivity and self-revision and exploratory parody of its storytelling. I started wondering if Segel, on some level, behind the scenes, is still in character as David Foster Wallace from “The End of the Tour.” Then I caught an obstructed view, on Fredwynn’s meaningfully curated bookshelf, of the spine of “Infinite Jest.”


newyorker--2020-02-28--How Iran Became a New Epicenter of the Coronavirus Outbreak

Iran ’ s deputy health minister , Iraj Harirchi , was pale and drenched in sweat during a press conference on Monday as he told reporters that the Islamic Republic had “ almost stabilized ” the country ’ s outbreak of coronavirus .
He mopped his brow so often that an aide scurried to the lectern with a box of tissues .
Harirchi dismissed as hype an Iranian lawmaker ’ s claim that fifty people had already died from COVID-19 .
“ I will resign if the numbers are even half or a quarter of this , ” he said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confirmed cases , with twelve deaths .
Iran opposed quarantines , he said , because they belonged to an era before the First World War— “ to the plague , cholera , stuff like that.
” The next day , Harirchi confirmed in a video—from quarantine—that he had contracted coronavirus .
Iran , a country of eighty-three million people , has now become one of the global epicenters of the coronavirus—with the highest mortality rate in the world .
Based on official numbers , the mortality rate in Iran has fluctuated daily , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ compared to three per cent in China and less everywhere else .
Iran is also unique , because a disproportionate number of confirmed cases are senior government officials .
On Thursday , the Vice-President , Masoumeh Ebtekar—who gained fame in 1979 as Sister Mary , the spokeswoman for the students who seized the U.S. Embassy and took fifty-two Americans hostage—announced that she , too , had contracted the coronavirus .
The day before , she had attended a meeting with President Hassan Rouhani and his cabinet .
Two members of parliament , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Security and Foreign Policy , have also been infected , as has the mayor of a district in Tehran and a senior cleric who had served as Iran ’ s Ambassador to the Vatican .
One of the lawmakers , Mahmoud Sadeghi , tweeted on Tuesday , “ I send this message in a situation where I have little hope of surviving in this world.
” The former Vatican Ambassador , who was eighty-one , died on Thursday .
So did Elham Sheikhi , a member of the women ’ s national soccer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s official counts—three hundred and eighty-eight confirmed cases and thirty-four deaths , as of Friday—may be grossly underreported .
In an early analysis published on Monday , six Canadian epidemiologists calculated that Iran probably had more than eighteen thousand cases of coronavirus .
Their mathematical model was based on Iran ’ s official death toll , the disease ’ s infection and mortality rates worldwide , inflections in other countries traced to Iran , flight data , and travel patterns .
“ Given the low volumes of air travel to countries with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iran ( such as Canada ) , it is likely that Iran is currently experiencing a COVID-19 epidemic of significant size , ” they concluded .
Because of the wide margin of error , the number of cases could range from as low as thirty-seven hundred to as high as fifty-three thousand .
In the end , the Canadian epidemiologists settled on eighteen thousand three hundred , with a ninety-five-per-cent confidence rate .
All of their estimates are many , many times higher than the figures that Iran has reported .
Their model @ @ @ @ @ @ @ preliminary research that has not yet been peer-reviewed .
Kamiar Alaei , a widely recognized Iranian global health-policy expert who co-founded an innovative H.I.V .
clinic in Tehran , also emphasized the tricky and still evolving mathematics of coronavirus contagion .
“ The mortality rate elsewhere is around one to two per cent , and three per cent in China , ” Alaei , who is now a co-president of the Institute for International Health and Education , in Albany , told me .
“ Iran has announced thirty-four deaths , although some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a hundred and thirty-four and even two hundred .
So if the death rate is only one per cent , then the total number of cases would be between thirty-four hundred and ten thousand or even twenty thousand.
” The outbreak appears to have started in Qom , the conservative city of Shiite seminaries run by leading ayatollahs , about two hours from Tehran .
It is also home to the Fatima Masumeh shrine—famed for its giant gold dome and intricate blue tilework—which draws pilgrims from all over the world .
( For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shrine complex whenever I go to Qom . )
The first mention of the disease by the government was a report of two deaths in the city on February 19th .
Initial reports indicate that the carrier of the virus may have been a merchant who travelled between Qom and Wuhan , in China , where COVID-19 is believed to have originated .
The outbreak is estimated to have begun between three and six weeks ago , which would mean that the two Iranians who died could have been sick and infecting others @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the first reported death in Iran , COVID-19 had spread to twenty-four of the country ’ s thirty-one provinces .
The number of cases has roughly doubled daily since Tuesday .
Instead of closing down public sites , a measure that public-health experts have taken in other countries , the head of the shrine in Qom called on pilgrims to keep coming .
“ We consider this holy shrine to be a place of healing .
That means people should come here to heal from spiritual and physical diseases , ” Mohammad Saeedi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iran ’ s Supreme Leader in Qom , said in a video .
Cases traced back to Iran have been reported in Azerbaijan , Afghanistan , Bahrain , Canada , Georgia , Iraq , Kuwait , Lebanon , Oman , Pakistan , and the United Arab Emirates .
Many of these cases have been linked specifically to visits to Qom .
Politics may have played a role in the government ’ s handling of the health crisis , Alaei , the health-policy expert , told me .
The outbreak coincided with two major @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , on February 11th , and the parliamentary election , on February 21st .
“ The government didn ’ t want to acknowledge that they had a coronavirus outbreak because they feared it would impact participation in these two events , ” he said .
“ So for weeks there was a huge silence.
” Less than forty-three per cent of Iranian voters turned out for the election , the lowest rate of participation since the 1979 revolution .
Both voters and poll workers were photographed wearing masks .
“ It was the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Iran , ” Alaei said .
“ It ’ s very unfortunate , as Iran has a very well-established infrastructure for the health system and well-educated doctors.
” Alaei was imprisoned in 2008 for “ communicating with the enemy , ” running espionage rings , and trying to “ launch a velvet revolution ” against the government in Tehran .
He spent thirty months in the notorious Evin Prison .
He moved to the United States after his release .
The coronavirus is also becoming a new flashpoint between Iran and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Supreme Leader , Ayatollah Ali Khamenei , accused Iran ’ s enemies of exaggerating the threat of coronavirus to scare voters away from the polls .
“ This negative propaganda about the virus began a couple of months ago and grew larger ahead of the election , ” he said .
“ Their media did not miss the tiniest opportunity for dissuading Iranian voters and resorting to the excuse of disease and the virus.
” On Wednesday , the U.S. Secretary of State , Mike Pompeo , countered that Iran was lying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spread of the virus .

Iran’s deputy health minister, Iraj Harirchi, was pale and drenched in sweat during a press conference on Monday as he told reporters that the Islamic Republic had “almost stabilized” the country’s outbreak of coronavirus. He mopped his brow so often that an aide scurried to the lectern with a box of tissues. Harirchi dismissed as hype an Iranian lawmaker’s claim that fifty people had already died from COVID-19. “I will resign if the numbers are even half or a quarter of this,” he said, adding that Iran had only sixty-one confirmed cases, with twelve deaths. Iran opposed quarantines, he said, because they belonged to an era before the First World War—“to the plague, cholera, stuff like that.” The next day, Harirchi confirmed in a video—from quarantine—that he had contracted coronavirus.
Iran, a country of eighty-three million people, has now become one of the global epicenters of the coronavirus—with the highest mortality rate in the world. Based on official numbers, the mortality rate in Iran has fluctuated daily, between eight and eighteen per cent, compared to three per cent in China and less everywhere else. Iran is also unique, because a disproportionate number of confirmed cases are senior government officials. On Thursday, the Vice-President, Masoumeh Ebtekar—who gained fame in 1979 as Sister Mary, the spokeswoman for the students who seized the U.S. Embassy and took fifty-two Americans hostage—announced that she, too, had contracted the coronavirus. The day before, she had attended a meeting with President Hassan Rouhani and his cabinet. Two members of parliament, including the chairman of the Committee on National Security and Foreign Policy, have also been infected, as has the mayor of a district in Tehran and a senior cleric who had served as Iran’s Ambassador to the Vatican. One of the lawmakers, Mahmoud Sadeghi, tweeted on Tuesday, “I send this message in a situation where I have little hope of surviving in this world.” The former Vatican Ambassador, who was eighty-one, died on Thursday.
Iran’s deputy health minister, Iraj Harirchi, wipes sweat from his brow during a press conference, on Monday. He later confirmed that he has contracted coronavirus. Photograph by Mehdi Bolourian / Fars News / AFP / Getty
Iran’s official counts—three hundred and eighty-eight confirmed cases and thirty-four deaths, as of Friday—may be grossly underreported. In an early analysis published on Monday, six Canadian epidemiologists calculated that Iran probably had more than eighteen thousand cases of coronavirus. Their mathematical model was based on Iran’s official death toll, the disease’s infection and mortality rates worldwide, inflections in other countries traced to Iran, flight data, and travel patterns. “Given the low volumes of air travel to countries with identified cases of COVID-19 with origin in Iran (such as Canada), it is likely that Iran is currently experiencing a COVID-19 epidemic of significant size,” they concluded. Because of the wide margin of error, the number of cases could range from as low as thirty-seven hundred to as high as fifty-three thousand. In the end, the Canadian epidemiologists settled on eighteen thousand three hundred, with a ninety-five-per-cent confidence rate. All of their estimates are many, many times higher than the figures that Iran has reported. Their model was published on medRxiv, which posts preliminary research that has not yet been peer-reviewed.
Kamiar Alaei, a widely recognized Iranian global health-policy expert who co-founded an innovative H.I.V. clinic in Tehran, also emphasized the tricky and still evolving mathematics of coronavirus contagion. “The mortality rate elsewhere is around one to two per cent, and three per cent in China,” Alaei, who is now a co-president of the Institute for International Health and Education, in Albany, told me. “Iran has announced thirty-four deaths, although some unofficial reports claim it is at least a hundred and thirty-four and even two hundred. So if the death rate is only one per cent, then the total number of cases would be between thirty-four hundred and ten thousand or even twenty thousand.”
The outbreak appears to have started in Qom, the conservative city of Shiite seminaries run by leading ayatollahs, about two hours from Tehran. It is also home to the Fatima Masumeh shrine—famed for its giant gold dome and intricate blue tilework—which draws pilgrims from all over the world. (For its historic beauty, I visit the shrine complex whenever I go to Qom.) The first mention of the disease by the government was a report of two deaths in the city on February 19th. Initial reports indicate that the carrier of the virus may have been a merchant who travelled between Qom and Wuhan, in China, where COVID-19 is believed to have originated. The outbreak is estimated to have begun between three and six weeks ago, which would mean that the two Iranians who died could have been sick and infecting others for weeks.
Within eight days of the first reported death in Iran, COVID-19 had spread to twenty-four of the country’s thirty-one provinces. The number of cases has roughly doubled daily since Tuesday. Instead of closing down public sites, a measure that public-health experts have taken in other countries, the head of the shrine in Qom called on pilgrims to keep coming. “We consider this holy shrine to be a place of healing. That means people should come here to heal from spiritual and physical diseases,” Mohammad Saeedi, who is also the representative of Iran’s Supreme Leader in Qom, said in a video. Cases traced back to Iran have been reported in Azerbaijan, Afghanistan, Bahrain, Canada, Georgia, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Pakistan, and the United Arab Emirates. Many of these cases have been linked specifically to visits to Qom.
Politics may have played a role in the government’s handling of the health crisis, Alaei, the health-policy expert, told me. The outbreak coincided with two major milestones—the anniversary of Iran’s revolution, on February 11th, and the parliamentary election, on February 21st. “The government didn’t want to acknowledge that they had a coronavirus outbreak because they feared it would impact participation in these two events,” he said. “So for weeks there was a huge silence.” Less than forty-three per cent of Iranian voters turned out for the election, the lowest rate of participation since the 1979 revolution. Both voters and poll workers were photographed wearing masks.
“It was the political decision that led to this outbreak in Iran,” Alaei said. “It’s very unfortunate, as Iran has a very well-established infrastructure for the health system and well-educated doctors.” Alaei was imprisoned in 2008 for “communicating with the enemy,” running espionage rings, and trying to “launch a velvet revolution” against the government in Tehran. He spent thirty months in the notorious Evin Prison. He moved to the United States after his release.
The coronavirus is also becoming a new flashpoint between Iran and the United States. After the election, the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, accused Iran’s enemies of exaggerating the threat of coronavirus to scare voters away from the polls. “This negative propaganda about the virus began a couple of months ago and grew larger ahead of the election,” he said. “Their media did not miss the tiniest opportunity for dissuading Iranian voters and resorting to the excuse of disease and the virus.” On Wednesday, the U.S. Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, countered that Iran was lying about “vital details” of the spread of the virus.
The timing of the epidemic is particularly dire for Iran’s economy. As part of President Trump’s “maximum-pressure campaign,” the U.S. reimposed economic sanctions on Iran—and any foreign company or country that does business with it—in November, 2018. Iran’s economy contracted more than nine per cent last year. Since the coronavirus outbreak began, ten days ago, eleven countries, including major trading partners such as Afghanistan, Iraq, and Turkey, have closed their borders to the Islamic Republic, according to Adnan Mazarei, an economist at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, in Washington. “The entire Middle East region could soon be affected by Iran’s role as an epicenter of this contagion,” he wrote on Thursday. “The Middle East region will certainly be hit by a new round of downward pressure on oil prices on account of a decline in demand for oil by China and elsewhere,” he added. And China has accounted for a quarter of all Iranian trade.
Internal commerce is also likely to take a hit on the eve of Nowruz, the Persian New Year, in three weeks. Nowruz is the country’s biggest holiday, and the ritual is to buy new clothes and toys—and to travel to the Caspian coast or other vacation spots to take a break from Iran’s mounting crises. The more that Nowruz celebrations are curtailed, the greater the danger for protests about the epidemic, global isolation, and unanticipated economic setbacks. Two waves of protests have challenged the regime since November.


newyorker--2020-02-28--The Real Objective of Mob Violence Against Muslims in India

During the past several days , more than thirty people have been killed in mob violence primarily targeting Muslims in the Indian capital of New Delhi .
At the center of the conflict is the Citizenship Amendment Act ( C.A.A . )
, a law passed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi ’ s Hindu majoritarian government that creates a path to citizenship for immigrants of different faiths—unless they happen to be Muslim .
Its passage sparked demonstrations across the country , many of which have been met by force from police and right-wing groups .
Indian journalists have chronicled police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ destroyed and Muslim residents have been beaten .
There have also been reports of police officers beating Muslims , including the imam of a local mosque .
Many of the Hindu mobs have chanted “ Jai Shri Ram , ” or “ Victory to Lord Ram , ” a favored slogan of Modi ’ s Bharatiya Janata Party ( B.J.P. )
.
Modi , who took office in 2014 , has in recent months moved aggressively to restrict the rights of Muslim residents .
Before the passage of the C.A.A.
, in December @ @ @ @ @ @ @ revoked the autonomy of India ’ s only Muslim-majority state , Kashmir , and implemented the National Register of Citizens ( N.R.C . )
in the state of Assam , which forced people to verify or forfeit their citizenship .
And in Delhi on Sunday , a member of Modi ’ s party called on the police to get tough with protesters , or watch his followers do so .
Several days later , Modi , who was hosting President Donald Trump when the violence broke out , belatedly called for the restoration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discuss the volatile situation in Delhi , I spoke by phone with Raghu Karnad , a journalist and the author of the book “ Farthest Field : An Indian Story of the Second World War.
” He was in northeastern Delhi this week , where he and several other journalists barely managed to escape a mob .
During our conversation , which has been edited for length and clarity , we discussed his experiences reporting on the violence , how the Modi government capitalizes on the conflict between Hindus and Muslims , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ India .
What have your experiences been like the past several days ?
Wherever you go in the country , something seems to crop up with this protest movement .
I went to the northeastern part of the city on Tuesday , to try and assess for myself what was happening there .
What was evident through the afternoon was that gangs of young , angry men had been let loose on very marginal , vulnerable neighborhoods , and that police were either doing a very poor job or refraining from controlling them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was “ clash ” —that young Hindu and Muslim men were “ clashing , ” and committing violence and vandalism on each other ’ s property .
What happens increasingly with events like this in India is that an intensely polarized and rapid-acting media machine makes it impossible to discern what is really happening , or what the facts on the ground are .
Even if you work in the press , it is getting harder and harder to distinguish what an image is actually showing you .
Was the video that has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to show one community attacking another what it claims to be ?
Or is it something completely different ?
It became necessary for me to go down there and take the temperature of the place myself .
I want to go back to the news environment , but what did you mean by “ let loose ” ?
Because it is very hard to understand how much of this is planned and how much is spontaneous .
What was visible and obvious was that young men who were Hindu and young men who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there was an immediate dispute about which group was better armed , and whether it was the Hindus who were carrying firearms or the Muslims who were carrying firearms , whether it was the Hindus setting fire to shops or the Muslims setting fire to shops .
If you have lived in India for long enough , or been a journalist here long enough , you try to tune that particular question out .
Communal riots have been the permanent black eye on the face of Indian democracy , and it is only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more Hindus were killed or more Muslims were killed , and which community was the guilty party , that the real question that never gets enough attention is why authorities fail to act in the moment to stop those riots .
And that was exactly the salient question yesterday .
This is the capital of India .
These regions are somewhat on the periphery , but you can jump on the metro and be there in thirty minutes from the center of Delhi .
The police were obviously there in large numbers , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ standing by , and it is increasingly clear that they were sometimes slipping into participating into the violence themselves .
We have images of police destroying security cameras and standing by while young men collect debris to pelt each other , and there are also allegations that the police did some of the throwing themselves .
The principal question is why the police and the government allow the riots to take place , because it is clearly in their capacity to stop them .
It ’ s also why it was interesting for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , when a lot of journalists had drifted back to their newsrooms to file their stories and hand over footage , and to find that the police were literally standing by as gangs of young men continued to set homes on fire .
I understand the point you are making about the most important question not being who did what but , rather , why it is allowed to happen .
But , just to clarify : If gangs of Muslim youths were burning Hindu temples , I assume the police would not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that ’ s definitely correct .
And that was a case that was proven at the very start of this protest movement , which went national when groups of mostly Muslim protesters at a university called Jamia started a protest which became unruly , and they set fire to buses , and they were repaid for that with the police storming the university and intruding into the university library to assault and arrest students .
There is some contingency that depends on which government is in power and which government controls the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Delhi in the present day , the control of the police is with the Home Ministry , which is in the central government , and what has been very clear is that the right of citizens—including , especially , Muslim citizens—to protest , even peacefully , is barely being respected .
I think I am just trying to avoid saying the obvious here .
At the end of the day , there was plenty of evidence that the violence continued and the young men allowed to remain on the street , and allowed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The reason the Delhi police are controlled by the Home Ministry is that it is the capital , correct ?
Yes , they are controlled by the central government and not by the state government .

During the past several days, more than thirty people have been killed in mob violence primarily targeting Muslims in the Indian capital of New Delhi. At the center of the conflict is the Citizenship Amendment Act (C.A.A.), a law passed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu majoritarian government that creates a path to citizenship for immigrants of different faiths—unless they happen to be Muslim. Its passage sparked demonstrations across the country, many of which have been met by force from police and right-wing groups. Indian journalists have chronicled police inaction as Muslims’ property has been destroyed and Muslim residents have been beaten. There have also been reports of police officers beating Muslims, including the imam of a local mosque. Many of the Hindu mobs have chanted “Jai Shri Ram,” or “Victory to Lord Ram,” a favored slogan of Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (B.J.P.).
Modi, who took office in 2014, has in recent months moved aggressively to restrict the rights of Muslim residents. Before the passage of the C.A.A., in December, 2019, Modi’s government revoked the autonomy of India’s only Muslim-majority state, Kashmir, and implemented the National Register of Citizens (N.R.C.) in the state of Assam, which forced people to verify or forfeit their citizenship. And in Delhi on Sunday, a member of Modi’s party called on the police to get tough with protesters, or watch his followers do so. Several days later, Modi, who was hosting President Donald Trump when the violence broke out, belatedly called for the restoration of “peace and normalcy.”
To discuss the volatile situation in Delhi, I spoke by phone with Raghu Karnad, a journalist and the author of the book “Farthest Field: An Indian Story of the Second World War.” He was in northeastern Delhi this week, where he and several other journalists barely managed to escape a mob. During our conversation, which has been edited for length and clarity, we discussed his experiences reporting on the violence, how the Modi government capitalizes on the conflict between Hindus and Muslims, and the difficulty of finding accurate reporting in India.
What have your experiences been like the past several days?
Wherever you go in the country, something seems to crop up with this protest movement. I went to the northeastern part of the city on Tuesday, to try and assess for myself what was happening there. What was evident through the afternoon was that gangs of young, angry men had been let loose on very marginal, vulnerable neighborhoods, and that police were either doing a very poor job or refraining from controlling them. The word that was used most was “clash”—that young Hindu and Muslim men were “clashing,” and committing violence and vandalism on each other’s property. What happens increasingly with events like this in India is that an intensely polarized and rapid-acting media machine makes it impossible to discern what is really happening, or what the facts on the ground are. Even if you work in the press, it is getting harder and harder to distinguish what an image is actually showing you. Was the video that has been sent to you that is supposed to show one community attacking another what it claims to be? Or is it something completely different? It became necessary for me to go down there and take the temperature of the place myself.
I want to go back to the news environment, but what did you mean by “let loose”? Because it is very hard to understand how much of this is planned and how much is spontaneous.
What was visible and obvious was that young men who were Hindu and young men who were Muslim were in confrontation, and there was an immediate dispute about which group was better armed, and whether it was the Hindus who were carrying firearms or the Muslims who were carrying firearms, whether it was the Hindus setting fire to shops or the Muslims setting fire to shops. If you have lived in India for long enough, or been a journalist here long enough, you try to tune that particular question out. Communal riots have been the permanent black eye on the face of Indian democracy, and it is only because we reduce them immediately to whether more Hindus were killed or more Muslims were killed, and which community was the guilty party, that the real question that never gets enough attention is why authorities fail to act in the moment to stop those riots. And that was exactly the salient question yesterday.
This is the capital of India. These regions are somewhat on the periphery, but you can jump on the metro and be there in thirty minutes from the center of Delhi. The police were obviously there in large numbers, and they were occasionally intervening and mostly standing by, and it is increasingly clear that they were sometimes slipping into participating into the violence themselves. We have images of police destroying security cameras and standing by while young men collect debris to pelt each other, and there are also allegations that the police did some of the throwing themselves. The principal question is why the police and the government allow the riots to take place, because it is clearly in their capacity to stop them. It’s also why it was interesting for me to go late in the evening, when a lot of journalists had drifted back to their newsrooms to file their stories and hand over footage, and to find that the police were literally standing by as gangs of young men continued to set homes on fire.
I understand the point you are making about the most important question not being who did what but, rather, why it is allowed to happen. But, just to clarify: If gangs of Muslim youths were burning Hindu temples, I assume the police would not let that occur, correct?
Yes, that’s definitely correct. And that was a case that was proven at the very start of this protest movement, which went national when groups of mostly Muslim protesters at a university called Jamia started a protest which became unruly, and they set fire to buses, and they were repaid for that with the police storming the university and intruding into the university library to assault and arrest students.
There is some contingency that depends on which government is in power and which government controls the police. When we are talking about Delhi in the present day, the control of the police is with the Home Ministry, which is in the central government, and what has been very clear is that the right of citizens—including, especially, Muslim citizens—to protest, even peacefully, is barely being respected. I think I am just trying to avoid saying the obvious here. At the end of the day, there was plenty of evidence that the violence continued and the young men allowed to remain on the street, and allowed to remain armed, were Hindu activists.
The reason the Delhi police are controlled by the Home Ministry is that it is the capital, correct?
Yes, they are controlled by the central government and not by the state government.
And the Home Minister is Amit Shah, who is maybe Modi’s closest adviser and a hardcore supporter of his policies. Do you have some sense of what low-level police were being told from their superiors?
I was making many attempts to speak to policemen because, for safety, we were trying to move from one area to another and one police station to another, and mostly they were refusing to answer any questions at all, including any questions about the violence. One policeman told me something interesting, which was that that day might have been chosen because so much of the Delhi police force was drawn off into the security arrangements for Donald Trump, and, therefore, in these areas, the police were going to be understaffed, which would allow these mobs a freer hand. That may have been a factor, but that certainly doesn’t explain the extent to which the police seemed to be standing by. One thing the police were never going to say is what orders they received, and from whom. But, by that time, I was personally watching a group of young men shouting Hindu religious slogans and trashing vehicles while police stood by. For what I witnessed, it was clear that a lot of the violence was not going to be suppressed.


newyorker--2020-02-28--Undecided Voters in Charleston Try to Make Up Their Minds

Subscribers to The New Yorker ’ s new 2020 election newsletter , On the Trail , received this piece in their in-boxes .
Sign up to receive future installments .
On Tuesday , a televised debate featuring seven of the Democratic candidates was held in Charleston , South Carolina .
I had come to the city to talk to voters and volunteers before the state ’ s Presidential primary , this Saturday .
I stopped by the debate hall , where I found a few dozen Donald Trump supporters chanting outside as a reporter from Breitbart News excitedly narrated his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I went up to one man with a pro-Trump sign and told him I was a reporter , too .
“ Your vibes tell me you do seek truth , ” he said .
He added , “ If anyone hurts you or anything , I ’ m a licensed attorney , and I believe in the First Amendment.
” I took his card .
He was Greek , he said , but he handed it to me bowing and speaking with a stereotypical , apparently Asian , accent .
One of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reporting is that many voters hold seemingly contradictory views .
In Charleston , I met fans of Pete Buttigieg who favor Medicare for All , which Buttigieg opposes , and supporters of the hedge-fund billionaire Tom Steyer who can ’ t stomach the existence of billionaires .
The Charleston City Paper advertised watch parties for a number of the candidates , and I decided to attend one for Michael Bloomberg , who ’ d had a rather memorable first debate a week earlier .
The paper said that Bloomberg ’ s people would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a fifteen-seat joint a half mile from the debate stage , where the walls are covered in photographs of famous African-Americans : Oprah , James Brown , Muhammad Ali , the Obama family .
The father-son team who run the place , Brooks Harrison , Sr. , and Brooks Harrison , Jr. , had gotten a call from someone with the Bloomberg team earlier that day , they told me , asking if they ’ d host a gathering .
Harrison , Sr. , has misgivings about stop-and-frisk , a policy that Bloomberg @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but he was inclined to support Bloomberg anyway .
Bloomberg “ isn ’ t in it for praise or money , ” Harrison , Sr. , told me .
“ He just wants to help people.
” They said they ’ d be happy to host the party .
I arrived shortly before the debate began .
The restaurant was completely empty .
“ Guess they ’ re not coming , ” Brooks , Sr. , said with a shrug .
The apparent flakiness of the billionaire ’ s team did not turn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But Harrison , Jr. , was leaning toward Bernie Sanders .
“ Canadians talk about how cheap their co-pays are , ” he told me .
“ It ’ s hella good there .
Bernie could bring that kind of thing here.
” I sat down and watched the debate on their TV , as a handful of regulars trickled in and out .
Essick Taylor , a fifty-year-old line cook , said he liked that Steyer , who has spent millions in South Carolina , could run a campaign “ on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was also open to voting for Sanders .
Orders began to pick up around 9:30 .
A thirty-five-year-old food deliveryman and janitor named Demetrius came in and sat down to watch for a bit .
He told me that he supported Joe Biden , who ’ s leading in state polls .
“ You got ta be a people person down here , ” Demetrius said .
“ Everybody cool with Joe .
He ’ s got the experience.
” We listened to the candidates talk about their support among the African-American community @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the cost of Medicare for All .
Brooks , Jr. , pulled out a flier that the Buttigieg team had dropped off at the restaurant .
It mentioned the candidate ’ s “ comprehensive investment in Black America , ” which it has dubbed the “ Douglass Plan , ” as in Frederick .
“ I see what you ’ re doing , ” Brooks , Jr. , said , shaking his head at what he perceived as the pandering of Mayor Pete .
“ It ’ s too much , ” he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Makayla Bolton , who ’ d stopped in , said , “ I don ’ t even wan na see the words ‘ Black America ’ ” on campaign fliers .
“ I just wan na hear issues.
” The debate was nearing its end , and Bolton listened to Sanders ’ s closing statement , in which he cited a line often attributed to ( among others ) Nelson Mandela : “ Everything is impossible until it happens.
” She liked what she heard .
As the Harrisons began shutting down the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them if the debate had changed their minds at all .
Brooks , Sr. , remained a Bloomberg guy .
“ I ’ m with Bernie , ” Brooks , Jr. , said , a little more emphatically than before .
“ But I ’ d still prefer Michelle , ” he said .
He gestured toward the wall where the Obama family portrait hung , adding , “ And I think most of my customers would , too .
”

Subscribers to The New Yorker’s new 2020 election newsletter, On the Trail, received this piece in their in-boxes. Sign up to receive future installments.
On Tuesday, a televised debate featuring seven of the Democratic candidates was held in Charleston, South Carolina. I had come to the city to talk to voters and volunteers before the state’s Presidential primary, this Saturday. I stopped by the debate hall, where I found a few dozen Donald Trump supporters chanting outside as a reporter from Breitbart News excitedly narrated his version of events into a video camera. I went up to one man with a pro-Trump sign and told him I was a reporter, too. “Your vibes tell me you do seek truth,” he said. He added, “If anyone hurts you or anything, I’m a licensed attorney, and I believe in the First Amendment.” I took his card. He was Greek, he said, but he handed it to me bowing and speaking with a stereotypical, apparently Asian, accent.
One of the first discoveries one makes in political reporting is that many voters hold seemingly contradictory views. In Charleston, I met fans of Pete Buttigieg who favor Medicare for All, which Buttigieg opposes, and supporters of the hedge-fund billionaire Tom Steyer who can’t stomach the existence of billionaires. The Charleston City Paper advertised watch parties for a number of the candidates, and I decided to attend one for Michael Bloomberg, who’d had a rather memorable first debate a week earlier. The paper said that Bloomberg’s people would be watching at Eastside Soul Food, a fifteen-seat joint a half mile from the debate stage, where the walls are covered in photographs of famous African-Americans: Oprah, James Brown, Muhammad Ali, the Obama family. The father-son team who run the place, Brooks Harrison, Sr., and Brooks Harrison, Jr., had gotten a call from someone with the Bloomberg team earlier that day, they told me, asking if they’d host a gathering. Harrison, Sr., has misgivings about stop-and-frisk, a policy that Bloomberg implemented as mayor of New York, but he was inclined to support Bloomberg anyway. Bloomberg “isn’t in it for praise or money,” Harrison, Sr., told me. “He just wants to help people.” They said they’d be happy to host the party.
I arrived shortly before the debate began. The restaurant was completely empty. “Guess they’re not coming,” Brooks, Sr., said with a shrug. The apparent flakiness of the billionaire’s team did not turn him off the candidate, he said. But Harrison, Jr., was leaning toward Bernie Sanders. “Canadians talk about how cheap their co-pays are,” he told me. “It’s hella good there. Bernie could bring that kind of thing here.”
I sat down and watched the debate on their TV, as a handful of regulars trickled in and out. Essick Taylor, a fifty-year-old line cook, said he liked that Steyer, who has spent millions in South Carolina, could run a campaign “on his own dime.” He said he was also open to voting for Sanders. Orders began to pick up around 9:30. A thirty-five-year-old food deliveryman and janitor named Demetrius came in and sat down to watch for a bit. He told me that he supported Joe Biden, who’s leading in state polls. “You gotta be a people person down here,” Demetrius said. “Everybody cool with Joe. He’s got the experience.”
We listened to the candidates talk about their support among the African-American community and racial justice, pregnancy discrimination and the cost of Medicare for All. Brooks, Jr., pulled out a flier that the Buttigieg team had dropped off at the restaurant. It mentioned the candidate’s “comprehensive investment in Black America,” which it has dubbed the “Douglass Plan,” as in Frederick. “I see what you’re doing,” Brooks, Jr., said, shaking his head at what he perceived as the pandering of Mayor Pete. “It’s too much,” he added. Harrison’s cousin, Makayla Bolton, who’d stopped in, said, “I don’t even wanna see the words ‘Black America’ ” on campaign fliers. “I just wanna hear issues.” The debate was nearing its end, and Bolton listened to Sanders’s closing statement, in which he cited a line often attributed to (among others) Nelson Mandela: “Everything is impossible until it happens.” She liked what she heard.
As the Harrisons began shutting down the place for the night, I asked them if the debate had changed their minds at all. Brooks, Sr., remained a Bloomberg guy. “I’m with Bernie,” Brooks, Jr., said, a little more emphatically than before. “But I’d still prefer Michelle,” he said. He gestured toward the wall where the Obama family portrait hung, adding, “And I think most of my customers would, too.”


newyorker--2020-02-28--C.D.C. Director Says Coronavirus Effort Could Be Helped by Quarantining Pence

WASHINGTON ( The Borowitz Report ) —The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said on Friday that @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus could be achieved by quarantining Mike Pence .
Speaking to lawmakers on Capitol Hill @ @ @ @ @ said that , given Pence ’ s record as a science denier who mishandled an @ @ @ @ @ the governor of Indiana , an immediate quarantine of the Vice-President was “ an essential @ @ @ @ @ Pence should be sealed off in a secure area , where he will have no @ @ @ @ @ computer , ” the director said .
“ That will go a long way toward @ @ @ @ @ otherwise cause.
” The C.D.C .
chief added that there were a number of places @ @ @ @ @ all of them in Antarctica .
Shortly after the C.D.C .
director ’ s testimony @ @ @ @ @ with the assessment .
“ The threat I pose to the nation has been wildly @ @ @ @ @ not know how to use a computer , ” he said .

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said on Friday that significant progress in battling the coronavirus could be achieved by quarantining Mike Pence.
Speaking to lawmakers on Capitol Hill, the C.D.C. director said that, given Pence’s record as a science denier who mishandled an AIDS outbreak while he was the governor of Indiana, an immediate quarantine of the Vice-President was “an essential first step.”
“Mike Pence should be sealed off in a secure area, where he will have no access to a phone or computer,” the director said. “That will go a long way toward containing the harm he might otherwise cause.”
The C.D.C. chief added that there were a number of places ideal for quarantining Pence, all of them in Antarctica.
Shortly after the C.D.C. director’s testimony, Pence forcefully took issue with the assessment. “The threat I pose to the nation has been wildly overstated, and I do not know how to use a computer,” he said.