presswatchers--2020-04-17--Washington Post does a public service by focusing on what’s missing from Trump’s plan, not what’s in

Washington Post does a public service by focusing on what’s missing from Trump’s plan, not what’s in it

Among all of the knee-jerk habits of Washington political reporters , one of the most ingrained has got to be that when the president of the United States makes a big announcement , you write about what he said .
Donald Trump has taken advantage of that nearly involuntary reflex more times than I can count , repeatedly getting the nation ’ s top political reporters to write about what he said even when what he was saying was a gigantic lie , or when the news was what he didn ’ t say .
One of my greatest aspirations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feature and magnify “ best practices ” in political reporting , not just despair over the worst .
So it gives me great pleasure to call attention to the Washington Post article about Trump ’ s Thursday evening news conference , where he released new “ guidelines ” for reopening America .
Ladies and gentlemen , a warm round of applause for Philip Rucker , Josh Dawsey and Yasmeen Abutaleb , who instead of simply repeating what Trump said , wrote about what was missing — namely any plan for the widespread national @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is essential .
The headline online was “ As testing outcry mounts , Trump cedes to states in announcing guidelines for slow reopening.
” It was even better in the print edition : “ In Trump plan , governors take on burdens of testing , reopening.
” And this wasn ’ t some news analysis or sidebar , this was the main story .
Here ’ s how it started : A few paragraphs later , a blunt explanation of what this was so obviously all about : And from that point on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most important news of the day : Not Trump ’ s blather , but the continued lack of federal testing efforts : The Post reporters didn ’ t get distracted by Trump ’ s slides .
As Michael Carome , director or Public Citizen ’ s Health Research Group , put it in a statement : Want to read some actually serious , informed guidelines for phased reopenings ?
Read this new report from Johns Hopkins University ’ s Center for Health Security .
It ’ s sort of a sequel to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrote about a few days ago .
If you think of where we are as Phase I , the report explains : I wish I could say that other major news organizations did as well as the Post on this story , but sadly , no .
( Although New York Times Ellen Barry ’ s fabulous article on the contact-tracing program in Massachusetts certainly qualifies as “ best practices ” in that category . )
Barry ’ s colleagues in the Times Washington bureau , Peter Baker and Michael D. Shear , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down – specifically on Trump ’ s “ reversal , ” only three days after saying that “ the president of the United States calls the shots ” and that he had the “ total ” authority to decide how and when the country would end widespread lockdowns .
Trump ’ s smack-talk about “ total ” authority was self-evidently absurd ad-libbing and ego-maintenance on his part – a total distraction from his ongoing failure — but folks like Baker and Maggie Haberman fell for it hook , line and sinker .
Baker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fact that Trump “ abandoned his threat to use what he had claimed was his absolute authority to impose his will on them.
” Finally , six paragraphs in , they began offering some context on what was missing : That ’ s some understatement right there .
The closest Baker and Shear came to serious analysis was in noting that the guidelines “ did not confront some difficult questions.
” The Associated Press coverage was even weaker .
Zeke Miller , Alan Suderman and Kevin Freking fell back on stenography .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t even know where they got that part about “ places that have strong testing.
” The only real context came in a quote from a Republican governor !
The Los Angeles Times story by Chris Megerian , Noah Bierman and Eli Stokols gave Trump way too much credit , saying he had “ bowed to public health experts who warned that moving too quickly — especially without the widespread testing that the government has struggled to deploy since the pandemic began — would jeopardize the fight against the coronavirus and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was a telling anecdote toward the end , though , where they wrote about a series of conference calls Trump made : The Washington Post story , for all its awesomeness , still didn ’ t get across many of the important points that I ’ ve been trying to make for a while now .
Most notably , Trump ’ s guidelines say gradual reopening should primarily be based on the number of confirmed new cases going down .
But reopening safely isn ’ t just about whether cases are going down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ area is ready to keep it that way once things reopen – whether it is prepared to spot and stop an outbreak .
And when it comes to what ’ s needed for that – which starts with testing , but also includes serious contact-tracing and isolation resources – Trump ’ s guidelines vaguely dump the onus on the states , listing them as “ State Preparedness Responsibilities.
” But only the federal government has the logistics and resources necessary to do what needs to be done .
And we need clear guidelines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ measure to judge their progress .
Trump ’ s announcement Thursday was a sham , and his guidelines are a scam .
It ’ s long past time more news organizations figured out how not to get so easily played .
Read more of my writing about media coverage of Trump and the coronavirus .
And please consider making a donation to keep Press Watch going .

Among all of the knee-jerk habits of Washington political reporters, one of the most ingrained has got to be that when the president of the United States makes a big announcement, you write about what he said.
Donald Trump has taken advantage of that nearly involuntary reflex more times than I can count, repeatedly getting the nation’s top political reporters to write about what he said even when what he was saying was a gigantic lie, or when the news was what he didn’t say.
One of my greatest aspirations here at Press Watch has been to feature and magnify “best practices” in political reporting, not just despair over the worst. So it gives me great pleasure to call attention to the Washington Post article about Trump’s Thursday evening news conference, where he released new “guidelines” for reopening America.
Ladies and gentlemen, a warm round of applause for Philip Rucker, Josh Dawsey and Yasmeen Abutaleb, who instead of simply repeating what Trump said, wrote about what was missing — namely any plan for the widespread national coronavirus testing that public health officials say is essential.
The headline online was “As testing outcry mounts, Trump cedes to states in announcing guidelines for slow reopening.” It was even better in the print edition: “In Trump plan, governors take on burdens of testing, reopening.”
And this wasn’t some news analysis or sidebar, this was the main story. Here’s how it started:
President Trump released federal guidelines Thursday night for a slow and staggered return to normal in places with minimal cases of the novel coronavirus, moving to try to resume economic activity even amid an outcry from political and health leaders about the nation’s testing capacity. Despite Trump’s desire for a May 1 reopening, his plan does not contain a date for implementation and is a vague set of recommendations for a three-phased reopening of businesses, schools and other gathering places in jurisdictions that satisfy broad criteria on symptoms, cases and hospital loads.
Context, not stenography!
A few paragraphs later, a blunt explanation of what this was so obviously all about:
Trump’s the-buck-stops-with-the-states posture is largely designed to shield himself from blame should there be new outbreaks after states reopen or for other problems, according to several current and former senior administration officials involved in the response who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.
And from that point on, the article was mainly about the most important news of the day: Not Trump’s blather, but the continued lack of federal testing efforts:
Governors have said one of the most important factors in making those determinations is testing data, but Trump’s plan does not contain a national testing strategy. Senior administration officials said that although the federal government will try to facilitate access to tests, states and localities will be responsible for developing and administering their own testing programs. Leaders across sectors, from elected officials to business executives to public-health experts, have amplified warnings this week that the nation is not ready to reopen in part because its testing system is woefully inadequate.
The Post reporters didn’t get distracted by Trump’s slides. As Michael Carome, director or Public Citizen’s Health Research Group, put it in a statement:
Any serious proposal must include a robust, federally funded and coordinated plan for massively scaled-up testing, community tracing and the isolation and quarantine of all infected individuals and their potentially infected contacts. Until such a program is implemented, any plan for the widespread reopening of American businesses is fatally flawed and pure folly.
Want to read some actually serious, informed guidelines for phased reopenings? Read this new report from Johns Hopkins University’s Center for Health Security. It’s sort of a sequel to the wonderful, more general roadmap that I wrote about a few days ago.
If you think of where we are as Phase I, the report explains:
A shift to Phase II could be considered when the following 4 criteria have been met: (1) the number of new cases has declined for at least 14 days; (2) rapid diagnostic testing capacity is sufficient to test, at minimum, all people with COVID-19 symptoms, as well as close contacts and those in essential roles; (3) the healthcare system is able to safely care for all patients, including having appropriate personal protective equipment for healthcare workers; and (4) there is sufficient public health capacity to conduct contact tracing for all new cases and their close contacts, as described in our National Plan to Enable Comprehensive COVID-19 Case Finding and Contact Tracing in the US.
I wish I could say that other major news organizations did as well as the Post on this story, but sadly, no. (Although New York Times Ellen Barry’s fabulous article on the contact-tracing program in Massachusetts certainly qualifies as “best practices” in that category.)
Barry’s colleagues in the Times Washington bureau, Peter Baker and Michael D. Shear, predictably focused on the political ups and down – specifically on Trump’s “reversal,” only three days after saying that “the president of the United States calls the shots” and that he had the “total” authority to decide how and when the country would end widespread lockdowns.
Trump’s smack-talk about “total” authority was self-evidently absurd ad-libbing and ego-maintenance on his part – a total distraction from his ongoing failure — but folks like Baker and Maggie Haberman fell for it hook, line and sinker.
Baker and Shear’s article led with the fact that Trump “abandoned his threat to use what he had claimed was his absolute authority to impose his will on them.”
Finally, six paragraphs in, they began offering some context on what was missing:
The guidelines envision proceeding without the comprehensive testing program that many public health experts have sought and opened the president to criticism that in his eagerness to start rebuilding a cratered economy, he may have encouraged some states to move too quickly and leave themselves exposed to a second wave of the coronavirus.
That’s some understatement right there.
The closest Baker and Shear came to serious analysis was in noting that the guidelines “did not confront some difficult questions.”
The Associated Press coverage was even weaker. Zeke Miller, Alan Suderman and Kevin Freking fell back on stenography. Consider their top, ugh:
President Donald Trump has given governors a road map for recovering from the economic pain of the coronavirus pandemic, laying out “a phased and deliberate approach” to restoring normal activity in places that have strong testing and are seeing a decrease in COVID-19 cases. “We’re starting our life again,” Trump said during his daily press briefing. “We’re starting rejuvenation of our economy again.”
I don’t even know where they got that part about “places that have strong testing.”
The only real context came in a quote from a Republican governor!
West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice, a Trump ally, cautiously floated the idea of reopening parts of the state, but said testing capacity and contact tracing would need to be considerably ramped up before restrictions could be safely lifted. “All would be forgotten very quickly if we moved into a stage quicker than we should, and then we got into a situation where we had people dying like flies,” Justice told reporters.
The Los Angeles Times story by Chris Megerian, Noah Bierman and Eli Stokols gave Trump way too much credit, saying he had “bowed to public health experts who warned that moving too quickly — especially without the widespread testing that the government has struggled to deploy since the pandemic began — would jeopardize the fight against the coronavirus and could lead to new outbreaks.”
There was a telling anecdote toward the end, though, where they wrote about a series of conference calls Trump made:
On one of the calls, business leaders warned the president that expanded testing was necessary before Americans could safely return to work, but the message was largely drowned out by Trump’s determination to solicit praise from the participants, according to a person briefed on one of the calls. “It was a joke. It was a complete farce,” said the person. “It was not a serious conversation.”
The Washington Post story, for all its awesomeness, still didn’t get across many of the important points that I’ve been trying to make for a while now.
Most notably, Trump’s guidelines say gradual reopening should primarily be based on the number of confirmed new cases going down.
But reopening safely isn’t just about whether cases are going down, it’s about whether an area is ready to keep it that way once things reopen – whether it is prepared to spot and stop an outbreak.
And when it comes to what’s needed for that – which starts with testing, but also includes serious contact-tracing and isolation resources – Trump’s guidelines vaguely dump the onus on the states, listing them as “State Preparedness Responsibilities.”
But only the federal government has the logistics and resources necessary to do what needs to be done. And we need clear guidelines with metrics that counties and states can measure to judge their progress.
Trump’s announcement Thursday was a sham, and his guidelines are a scam. It’s long past time more news organizations figured out how not to get so easily played.
Read more of my writing about media coverage of Trump and the coronavirus. And please consider making a donation to keep Press Watch going.


presswatchers--2020-04-21--Here’s exactly what Trump needs to do to boost coronavirus testing. Reporters should tell him, not a

Here’s exactly what Trump needs to do to boost coronavirus testing. Reporters should tell him, not ask him.

Finger-pointing is maybe Donald Trump ’ s best thing .
So asking him unspecific questions about why the country isn ’ t doing more coronavirus testing is just an invitation to disinformation and blame-shifting .
But the lack of testing has been the singular failure of his administration , from the very beginning of the crisis – when aggressive testing and tracing might actually have precluded a lockdown – to the present day , when the continued absence of a massive federal effort to test means that back-to-work orders will be tantamount to death sentences for many .
Public-health experts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of testing needs to be increased , not just a bit but by several – maybe even many — magnitudes before it ’ s safe for people to emerge from their homes .
And the only institution capable of the kind of industry-goosing and supply-chain management needed to achieve that is the federal government .
Rather than do something about it , Trump has alternately denied there ’ s a problem , blamed it on the governors , said he ’ s doing everything perfectly and denied any responsibility for anything .
Meanwhile @ @ @ @ @ @ @ availability , and despite the White House spin , testing numbers are not going up .
They are flat .
They ’ ve been flat pretty much all April , averaging just under 150,000 a day .
Every day without more testing is another wasted day .
Reporters at Trump ’ s press briefings are the only people representing the general public allowed anywhere near him , so they have a responsibility to make him face up to reality .
Instead of asking inane , easily gamed questions , they need to tell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he needs to do , and then demand to know why he ’ s not doing it .
They probably shouldn ’ t expect anything valuable in response – just more lies and insults .
But specific questions based on the consensus views of public-health experts are nevertheless an effective way to set the record straight , set the agenda , and hold him accountable .
Not just some more testing .
Magnitudes more testing .
There aren ’ t nearly enough people being tested right now even to meet our most obvious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people with symptoms and testing at-risk healthcare workers .
But moving forward , the problem is way worse than that : The scale is all wrong .
If the goal is to get the virus under control enough that it ’ s safe to go out again , we need testing to be increased to a whole different level .
Danielle Allen , a Harvard political science professor and director of the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics , explained in a Washington Post opinion column on Monday : If you want to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that instead of everyone staying home for fear of getting infected , it ’ s the people who are infected who stay home – you need to find them , trace their contacts , and isolate them .
And that , Allen writes , means increasing the number of tests from the current levels of about a million a week to something more like five million a day .
The center at Harvard that Allen directs published a hugely significant new Roadmap to Pandemic Resilience on Monday , representing the findings of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public health , technology , and ethics from across the country .
It ’ s those experts who agreed on the need to deliver at least 5 million tests per day by early June to help ensure a safe social opening .
They also concluded that the number will need to increase to 20 million tests per day by mid-summer to fully re-mobilize the economy .
Only the federal government can make this happen Ramping up the kind of production capacity to deliver anything close to 5 to 20 million tests per day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ task — not to mention wildly expensive .
No institution but the U.S. government could even contemplate taking it on .
And as currently structured , even the federal government can ’ t do it , according to the Harvard experts .
So they urge the establishment – either by the president or by Congress — of a Pandemic Testing Board : Right now , the supply chain is a mess , they write .
This is actually quite fascinating : Almost every link in the testing architecture from the final mile in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that process tests , the machine manufacturers , the factories producing RNA reagents , etc .
report almost an identical story .
All fault the other links in the chain for either lacking the relevant supply or demand to scale up , and all argue that what they have heard from others is that further supply is impossible or further demand is not forthcoming .
Technologists argue that there is little point in producing tools for contact tracing given the lack of testing capacity , while test producers claim no one will want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of common understanding , and disintegration are the classic hallmarks of the coordination failures that occur in complex , interdependent systems that need to rapidly change to serve a new demand .
In virtually every successful historical example of such rapid coordination , a central authority has set goals and ensured that each part of the chain meets the interlocking goals required for the chain to succeed .
This authority must have clarity on the levels in the supply chain and the kinds of output required at each level to reach desired targets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chain to act in conformity with this plan , to avoid failure in one part that would sow systemic distrust .
In the absence of a Pandemic Testing Board , another roadmap — “ A National COVID-19 Surveillance System : Achieving Containment , ” from Duke University ’ s Center for Health Policy – calls for the Centers for Disease Control , which has been largely marginalized by Trump , to take the lead in coordination .
So let ’ s ask Trump : Will you form a Pandemic Testing Board ?
Don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before us is akin to a war ?
Will you empower the CDC ?
Or are you condemning us to a future of finger-pointing and failure ?
And if he says everything is great , respond with some reality .
Christopher Weaver and Rebecca Ballhaus of the Wall Street Journal had a bravura story in the Wall Street Journal on Monday exposing just how badly the disarray , shortages and backlogs in the current supply chain are hampering testing even at its current scale : The article , which is not behind a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ On testing , Trump is at his most vulnerable – and defensive Trump has always had a hang-up about testing .
Early on in the coronavirus crisis , he made it clear that he measured his success by the number of infections in the U.S. – making testing a low , if not negative priority .
He marooned a cruise ship to keep the numbers down .
And Trump ’ s lies about testing have consistently been among his most brazen , right through to the present .
“ We have tremendous testing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said on Monday .
“ Remember this , we ’ ve tested more than any country in the world by far .
In fact , I think I read where if you add up every other country in the world , we ’ ve tested more.
” But our per capita testing rate is far below several other countries , and the rest of the world has actually done four times as many tests as we have .
He said “ our numbers are doubling ….almost on a weekly basis ” — when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he said the widespread , fact-based , expert-supported concerns about testing are simply partisan attempts take him down .
“ Oh , we ’ ll get him on testing , ” he said , mimicking his enemies .
Later , he launched into a screed : This has been going on for a long time .
Even three weeks ago , Washington Post reporter Philip Bump was able to report how consistently Trump lied about testing .
There was that conference call with governors in late March where Trump insisted “ I haven @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” even though complaints about testing had been constant — especially after Trump in early March declared that “ Anybody that wants a test can get a test , ” and called the tests as “ perfect ” as the communications he had with the Ukrainian president that got him impeached .
His current strategy is to blame the governors .
And for the record , Trump capped off his Monday defense with a shocking new promise .
“ We have tests coming out perhaps over the next two weeks that will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he said .
“ If it comes out , it ’ ll revolutionize the whole world of testing.
” The governors can ’ t do it themselves Aside from being a sad and pathetic example of passing the buck , Trump ’ s continued attempt to blame the governors for his own failing is simply nonsense – as the governors are increasingly making clear .
At Monday ’ s briefing-room event , Trump gleefully quoted New York Governor Andrew Cuomo acknowledging a big state role in testing .
But consider what else Cuomo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ key elements in the supply chain currently come from China , Cuomo explained : Cuomo is hardly alone .
Virginia Gov .
Ralph Northam said on CNN ’ s “ State of the Union ” on Sunday that governors are “ fighting a biological war… without the supplies we need.
” He called Trump and Pence ’ s insistence that there is enough testing capacity “ delusional.
” On the same show , Maryland Gov .
Larry Hogan , a Republican , said : I think this is probably the number one problem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the beginning of this crisis , the lack of testing .
And I have repeatedly made this argument to the leaders in Washington on behalf of the rest of the governors in America .
And I can tell you , I talk to governors on both sides of the aisle nearly every single day .
The administration , I think , is trying to ramp up testing , and trying — they are doing some things with respect to private labs .
But to try to push this off to say that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they should just get to work on testing , somehow we aren ’ t doing our job , is just absolutely false .
Every governor in America has been pushing and fighting and clawing to get more tests , not only from the federal government , but from every private lab in America and from all across the world .
And we continue to do so .
On April 14 Illinois Gov .
J.B. Pritzker told NPR , “ the truth is that the federal government has really been more of a hindrance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ testing issues.
” He continued : The $ 484 billion coronavirus relief bill that the Senate passed on Tuesday afternoon includes $ 25 billion for testing , $ 11 billion of that going directly to the states .
But that ’ s hardly likely to change Trump ’ s tune on testing .
Politico Playbook on Sunday shamefully turned over the top of its newsletter to an anonymous “ senior administration official ” who said that the talk about testing “ misses the real issue.
” And the official argued that the new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a lethargic bureaucratic process that had already failed to provide the testing innovation comparable to the private sector.
” Read more of my writing about media coverage of Trump and the coronavirus .
And please consider making a donation to keep Press Watch going .

Finger-pointing is maybe Donald Trump’s best thing.
So asking him unspecific questions about why the country isn’t doing more coronavirus testing is just an invitation to disinformation and blame-shifting.
But the lack of testing has been the singular failure of his administration, from the very beginning of the crisis – when aggressive testing and tracing might actually have precluded a lockdown – to the present day, when the continued absence of a massive federal effort to test means that back-to-work orders will be tantamount to death sentences for many.
Public-health experts are essentially unanimous that the current level of testing needs to be increased, not just a bit but by several – maybe even many — magnitudes before it’s safe for people to emerge from their homes. And the only institution capable of the kind of industry-goosing and supply-chain management needed to achieve that is the federal government.
Rather than do something about it, Trump has alternately denied there’s a problem, blamed it on the governors, said he’s doing everything perfectly and denied any responsibility for anything.
Meanwhile, due to a chronic lack of availability, and despite the White House spin, testing numbers are not going up. They are flat. They’ve been flat pretty much all April, averaging just under 150,000 a day.
Every day without more testing is another wasted day.
Reporters at Trump’s press briefings are the only people representing the general public allowed anywhere near him, so they have a responsibility to make him face up to reality. Instead of asking inane, easily gamed questions, they need to tell him specifically what the public-health experts say he needs to do, and then demand to know why he’s not doing it.
They probably shouldn’t expect anything valuable in response – just more lies and insults. But specific questions based on the consensus views of public-health experts are nevertheless an effective way to set the record straight, set the agenda, and hold him accountable.
Not just some more testing. Magnitudes more testing.
There aren’t nearly enough people being tested right now even to meet our most obvious, immediate, first-stage needs: diagnosing people with symptoms and testing at-risk healthcare workers.
But moving forward, the problem is way worse than that: The scale is all wrong. If the goal is to get the virus under control enough that it’s safe to go out again, we need testing to be increased to a whole different level.
Danielle Allen, a Harvard political science professor and director of the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics, explained in a Washington Post opinion column on Monday:
Some 20 to 40 percent of people infected with the novel coronavirus are asymptomatic. They are significant disease “vectors.” To control the disease without mass stay-at-home orders, you need to be able to test broadly enough to find those asymptomatic people and to find their contacts and test those people, too.
If you want to turn around our current paradigm – so that instead of everyone staying home for fear of getting infected, it’s the people who are infected who stay home – you need to find them, trace their contacts, and isolate them.
And that, Allen writes, means increasing the number of tests from the current levels of about a million a week to something more like five million a day.
That’s a 35-fold increase over today.
The center at Harvard that Allen directs published a hugely significant new Roadmap to Pandemic Resilience on Monday, representing the findings of a bipartisan group of experts in economics, public health, technology, and ethics from across the country.
It’s those experts who agreed on the need to deliver at least 5 million tests per day by early June to help ensure a safe social opening.
They also concluded that the number will need to increase to 20 million tests per day by mid-summer to fully re-mobilize the economy.
That’s a 140-fold increase over today.
They explained:
What we need to do is much bigger than most people realize. We need to massively scale-up testing, contact tracing, isolation, and quarantine—together with providing the resources to make these possible for all individuals…. Massive testing is essential because it is more finely targeted—more of a precision device than a blunt instrument. Rather than giving an entire city a stay-at-home order of indefinite duration, only those who are infected would need to stay at home or in a medical facility, and only for the specific amount of time required by the course of the disease.
Only the federal government can make this happen
Ramping up the kind of production capacity to deliver anything close to 5 to 20 million tests per day will be an immense and tremendously complicated task — not to mention wildly expensive. No institution but the U.S. government could even contemplate taking it on.
As the Harvard report explains:
Achieving a testing program at this scale requires supply-chain management and production capacity to deliver 5 to 20 millions of tests per day; distribution capacity to get these millions of tests to last-mile delivery personnel at the local level; and test administration personnel—a combination of local health care workers and service corps members, reinforced by state and national service corps (including entities like the Medical Reserves, U.S. Public Health Service Corps, and National Guard and, during the period of the emergency, AmeriCorps and Service Year Alliance). These service corps would need to be expanded. Massively scaling up testing itself will require (1) coordinating the ramp-up of existing capacity for test production and analysis; (2) integrating the ramp-up of innovation-based capacity; and (3) building the supporting infrastructure.
And as currently structured, even the federal government can’t do it, according to the Harvard experts. So they urge the establishment – either by the president or by Congress — of a Pandemic Testing Board:
Implementation of such a complex supply chain at this speed requires tight coordination most naturally facilitated by a Pandemic Testing Board (PTB), akin to the War Production Board that the United States created in World War II. The market has not so far supplied the necessary scale of test production. The basic problem is a classic one of coordination and planning that almost always afflicts complicated supply chains that need to be set up rapidly.
Right now, the supply chain is a mess, they write. This is actually quite fascinating:
Almost every link in the testing architecture from the final mile in cities and states back through the laboratories that process tests, the machine manufacturers, the factories producing RNA reagents, etc. report almost an identical story. All fault the other links in the chain for either lacking the relevant supply or demand to scale up, and all argue that what they have heard from others is that further supply is impossible or further demand is not forthcoming. Technologists argue that there is little point in producing tools for contact tracing given the lack of testing capacity, while test producers claim no one will want tests. Such systemic finger-pointing, lack of common understanding, and disintegration are the classic hallmarks of the coordination failures that occur in complex, interdependent systems that need to rapidly change to serve a new demand. In virtually every successful historical example of such rapid coordination, a central authority has set goals and ensured that each part of the chain meets the interlocking goals required for the chain to succeed. This authority must have clarity on the levels in the supply chain and the kinds of output required at each level to reach desired targets and must induce all parts of the chain to act in conformity with this plan, to avoid failure in one part that would sow systemic distrust.
In the absence of a Pandemic Testing Board, another roadmap — “A National COVID-19 Surveillance System: Achieving Containment,” from Duke University’s Center for Health Policy – calls for the Centers for Disease Control, which has been largely marginalized by Trump, to take the lead in coordination.
So let’s ask Trump: Will you form a Pandemic Testing Board? Don’t you agree that the challenge before us is akin to a war? Will you empower the CDC? Or are you condemning us to a future of finger-pointing and failure?
And if he says everything is great, respond with some reality.
It’s a mess
Christopher Weaver and Rebecca Ballhaus of the Wall Street Journal had a bravura story in the Wall Street Journal on Monday exposing just how badly the disarray, shortages and backlogs in the current supply chain are hampering testing even at its current scale:
The private sector hasn’t so far been able to deliver nearly enough tests to meet the huge demand in the U.S., more than six weeks after the Food and Drug Administration allowed private companies to manufacture test kits and put them to use without having to be approved. A signal White House effort to ramp up testing showcases the obstacles. Federal officials sought to distribute a new device by Abbott Laboratories around the country, but the push fell short when supplies proved scarce and the device’s reliability faced doubts, according to state officials and laboratory experts.
The article, which is not behind a firewall, supports the Harvard findings:
Absent a clearly organized system for allocating materials across the industry, “it feels a little bit like natural selection, doesn’t it?” said Andy Last, the chief operating officer at Bio-Rad Laboratories Inc., a California-based laboratory equipment manufacturer.
On testing, Trump is at his most vulnerable – and defensive
Trump has always had a hang-up about testing. Early on in the coronavirus crisis, he made it clear that he measured his success by the number of infections in the U.S. – making testing a low, if not negative priority. He marooned a cruise ship to keep the numbers down.
And Trump’s lies about testing have consistently been among his most brazen, right through to the present.
“We have tremendous testing, tremendous testing capability,” Trump said on Monday. “Remember this, we’ve tested more than any country in the world by far. In fact, I think I read where if you add up every other country in the world, we’ve tested more.”
But our per capita testing rate is far below several other countries, and the rest of the world has actually done four times as many tests as we have.
He said “our numbers are doubling ….almost on a weekly basis” — when they’re actually flat.
And he said the widespread, fact-based, expert-supported concerns about testing are simply partisan attempts take him down. “Oh, we’ll get him on testing,” he said, mimicking his enemies. Later, he launched into a screed:
But remember this, we’re dealing in politics. We’re dealing with a thing called November 3rd of this year. Do you know what November 3rd represents? Right? You know better than anybody in the room. November 3rd of this year, it’s called the presidential election. No matter what I do, no matter where we go, no matter how well we do, no matter what, if I came up with a tablet, you take it and this plague is gone, they’ll say Trump did a terrible job, terrible, terrible. Because that’s their soundbite. That’s the political soundbite. They know the great job we’ve done.
This has been going on for a long time. Even three weeks ago, Washington Post reporter Philip Bump was able to report how consistently Trump lied about testing.
There was that conference call with governors in late March where Trump insisted “I haven’t heard about testing in weeks,” even though complaints about testing had been constant — especially after Trump in early March declared that “Anybody that wants a test can get a test,” and called the tests as “perfect” as the communications he had with the Ukrainian president that got him impeached.
As Bump wrote:
There have been several phases to Trump’s public assurances about testing. In the first, he and his administration conflated the number of available kits with the number of tests that could be conducted, giving a false impression that testing was widely available. In the second, he criticized his predecessor’s administration for limiting the ability to conduct tests by forcing a reliance on government labs. In the third, he’s emphasized the number of tests being completed, particularly in the context of South Korea, whose broad testing regimen has been credited with keeping the number of cases in that country low.
His current strategy is to blame the governors.
And for the record, Trump capped off his Monday defense with a shocking new promise. “We have tests coming out perhaps over the next two weeks that will blow the whole industry away,” he said. “If it comes out, it’ll revolutionize the whole world of testing.”
He offered no details.
The governors can’t do it themselves
Aside from being a sad and pathetic example of passing the buck, Trump’s continued attempt to blame the governors for his own failing is simply nonsense – as the governors are increasingly making clear.
At Monday’s briefing-room event, Trump gleefully quoted New York Governor Andrew Cuomo acknowledging a big state role in testing. But consider what else Cuomo said:
The national manufacturers say they have supply chain issues. I’d like the federal government to help on those supply chain issues….This is a quagmire… Should the states take the lead on the tests? Yes, that’s exactly right. But we need the volume and the volume is going to be determined by how well those national manufacturers provide the kits to the 300 labs in New York.
On April 17, Cuomo said:
The president doesn’t want to help on testing…. I said the one issue we need help with it is testing. He said 11 times, “I don’t want to get involved in testing. It’s too complicated. It’s too hard.” I know it’s too complicated and it’s too hard. That’s why we need you to help. I can’t do an international supply chain. He wants to say, “Well, I did enough.” Yeah, none of us have done enough. We haven’t, because it’s not over.
Noting that some of the key elements in the supply chain currently come from China, Cuomo explained:
The federal government cannot wipe their hands of this and say, “Oh, the states are responsible for testing.” We cannot do it. We cannot do it without federal help. I’m willing to do what I can do and more, but I’m telling you I don’t do China relations. I don’t do international supply chain and that’s where the federal government can help. Also remember the federal government at the same time is developing testing capacity. So we wind up in this bizarre situation that we were in last time, 50 states all competing for these precious resources. In this case it’s testing and then the federal government comes in and says to those companies, I want to buy the tests also. This is mayhem. We need a coordinated approach between the federal government and the states.
Cuomo is hardly alone. Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam said on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday that governors are “fighting a biological war… without the supplies we need.” He called Trump and Pence’s insistence that there is enough testing capacity “delusional.”
On the same show, Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan, a Republican, said:
I think this is probably the number one problem in America, and has been from the beginning of this crisis, the lack of testing. And I have repeatedly made this argument to the leaders in Washington on behalf of the rest of the governors in America. And I can tell you, I talk to governors on both sides of the aisle nearly every single day. The administration, I think, is trying to ramp up testing, and trying — they are doing some things with respect to private labs. But to try to push this off to say that the governors have plenty of testing, and they should just get to work on testing, somehow we aren’t doing our job, is just absolutely false. Every governor in America has been pushing and fighting and clawing to get more tests, not only from the federal government, but from every private lab in America and from all across the world. And we continue to do so.
Similarly, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer said:
You talk to any epidemiologist, and they tell you, we should be testing between 1 and 2 percent of our population regularly. And that’s precisely why we need these fundamental supply chain issues addressed, so we can ramp up our testing, and have some confidence in the numbers, and know when it’s safe to engage, and be able to track folks after we have started to reengage parts of our economy.
On April 14 Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker told NPR, “the truth is that the federal government has really been more of a hindrance than a help in most of the testing issues.” He continued:
We got very little from the federal government. We’re now up to almost 8,000 a day. We need to get past 10,000. And frankly, we’re going to need a lot more than that if we’re going to start to think about, you know, how we reopen the economy.
The $484 billion coronavirus relief bill that the Senate passed on Tuesday afternoon includes $25 billion for testing, $11 billion of that going directly to the states.
But that’s hardly likely to change Trump’s tune on testing. Politico Playbook on Sunday shamefully turned over the top of its newsletter to an anonymous “senior administration official” who said that the talk about testing “misses the real issue.” And the official argued that the new funding from Congress would “only fund a lethargic bureaucratic process that had already failed to provide the testing innovation comparable to the private sector.”
Read more of my writing about media coverage of Trump and the coronavirus. And please consider making a donation to keep Press Watch going.


presswatchers--2020-04-23--Trump next con is convincing people it’s safe to go back to work. But the public has wised up.

Donald Trump is embarking on a major PR campaign intended to convince people it ’ s safe to resume their normal lives , Zeke Miller of the Associated Press reports .
And his controversial but still widely broadcast afternoon briefings are set to play a central role .
Trump aides are hoping “ to use the daily White House briefings to inundate Americans with facts and figures on testing and therapeutics , blanketing television with graphics of flattening and declining curves and statistics on the number of testing kits available , ” Miller writes .
Miller quotes Kevin Hassett , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ We need to create the kind of confidence in America that makes it so that everybody goes back to work.
” But Miller ’ s AP colleagues Julie Pace and Hannah Fingerhut are simultaneously reporting on new poll results finding that “ few Americans regularly look to or trust Trump as a source of information on the pandemic.
” The survey from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found only 23 percent of Americans say they can trust information about the virus from Trump quite a bit or more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ News poll , 63 percent of Americans are more worried about restrictions lifting too fast and worsening the outbreak than they are about lifting restrictions too slowly and worsening the economy .
So what would make people comfortable to resume normal activity ?
According to the progressive Navigator survey , it ’ s tests , monitoring , masks and health experts saying it ’ s OK. What wouldn ’ t ?
As Navigator pollster Nick Gourevitch tweeted : “ A grand declaration from the President saying that we are open for business.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : It ’ s entirely appropriate that widespread testing come in at the top of the list .
That ’ s what public-health experts have been saying for weeks – slowly but surely influencing the media coverage and evidently making a huge impression on public opinion , if not making a dent in Trump ’ s thinking .
Whether it is incompetence , defensiveness , cluelessness or a self-interested desire to conceal the extent of the virus ’ s spread , Trump has continued to insist that testing , which has been lagging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In fact , at Wednesday ’ s afternoon ’ s briefing , he suggested there might be too much .
That elicited a marvelous exchange on CNN between anchor Don Lemon – who has been one of the most persistent and outraged TV proponents of more testing – and Daniel Dale , the long-suffering fact-checker extraordinaire .
Lemon played a clip of Trump insisting that “ we are the king of testing ” and that “ we ’ re doing more testing I think than probably any of the governors even want.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is no governor to my knowledge who has complained that the federal government is doing more testing than they want .
I don ’ t even know if that ’ s possible in a pandemic.
” Trump has a particularly poor track record when it comes to predictions – from his early forecast that the virus would disappear “ within a couple of days , ” to his assurances last month that it would “ miraculously go away , ” to his recent , constant insistence that there is “ a lot of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Trump ’ s anticipated Easter Sunday reopening day has come and gone , as has his March 31 prediction that after a “ very tough two weeks , ” things would “ get better all of a sudden… like a burst of light.
” And his promises – notably of more testing , including a Google-built website directing people to dozens of drive-through testing sites in big-box parking lots – have come to naught .
Cynicism is the order of the day .
Here ’ s Jeremy Konyndyk , an expert in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Development , on CNBC on Thursday : I ’ m not putting any stock in any reports of what may be coming on testing until we actually see it come one line and we see it work .
We have been hearing… miracles are soon to arrive on testing .
We ’ ve been hearing that for more than a month , since that Rose Garden event with all of the CEOs from the private sector promising great things which a month later has still not materialized .
We are stuck at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a day .
We ’ ve been there for weeks .
We haven ’ t budged .
Meanwhile , the case counts over that period have grown dramatically .
So compared to the level of cases , we ’ re actually losing ground on testing .
Until testing actually begins to come online at scale we are not ready to reopen because we don ’ t really know how many cases there are .
Not in Georgia , and not anywhere else .
Not for real .
The role of the press corps @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pulitzer-Prize winning former New York Times reporter James Risen wrote on Wednesday that “ some of Trump ’ s most important enablers are the reporters in the White House press corps.
” He continued : I ’ ve argued there ’ s a better way , and that White House reporters could perform a public service if they aggressively confronted Trump with facts and with the consensus view of public-health experts .
They could also summarize a powerful New York Times opinion column by Aaron E. Carroll , a professor of pediatrics at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which he explains that the assumption that the infections will go down as fast as it came up is , unfortunately , magical thinking .
Carroll writes : The press corps could also call more attention to how Trump ’ s singular focus seems to be on what will help him politically – namely getting the economy going again .
And they could contrast his approach with those of other leaders .
Gourevitch , the pollster , concludes that one big reason the public doesn ’ t trust Trump on issues like reopening @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a public-health issue rather than an economic one .
As I ’ ve noted before , over on the West Coast , California Gov .
Gavin Newsom is a useful point of comparison .
Phil Willon and Taryn Luna write in the Los Angeles Times that Newsom on Wednesday said that increased testing is needed before he reaches any conclusions about when it ’ s safe to relax stay-at-home orders – and he announced new initiatives complete with metrics .
That comes after Newsom last week set conditions for reopening that don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are trending down – like Trump ’ s guidelines do – but on whether his state is prepared to keep them trending down once it reopens .
Finally , the White House press corps has now been warned that Trump intends to flood his briefings with statistics in an attempt to show the nation ’ s readiness .
That creates an obligation for reporters to put those numbers in context , and hold Trump accountable to reasonable metrics — which if he doesn ’ t set , someone else should set for him @

Donald Trump is embarking on a major PR campaign intended to convince people it’s safe to resume their normal lives, Zeke Miller of the Associated Press reports. And his controversial but still widely broadcast afternoon briefings are set to play a central role.
Trump aides are hoping “to use the daily White House briefings to inundate Americans with facts and figures on testing and therapeutics, blanketing television with graphics of flattening and declining curves and statistics on the number of testing kits available,” Miller writes.
Miller quotes Kevin Hassett, a senior White House adviser, saying: “We need to create the kind of confidence in America that makes it so that everybody goes back to work.”
But Miller’s AP colleagues Julie Pace and Hannah Fingerhut are simultaneously reporting on new poll results finding that “few Americans regularly look to or trust Trump as a source of information on the pandemic.” The survey from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found only 23 percent of Americans say they can trust information about the virus from Trump quite a bit or more.
And according to a new CBS News poll, 63 percent of Americans are more worried about restrictions lifting too fast and worsening the outbreak than they are about lifting restrictions too slowly and worsening the economy.
So what would make people comfortable to resume normal activity? According to the progressive Navigator survey, it’s tests, monitoring, masks and health experts saying it’s OK.
What wouldn’t? As Navigator pollster Nick Gourevitch tweeted: “A grand declaration from the President saying that we are open for business.” Here’s Gourevitch’s slide:
It’s entirely appropriate that widespread testing come in at the top of the list. That’s what public-health experts have been saying for weeks – slowly but surely influencing the media coverage and evidently making a huge impression on public opinion, if not making a dent in Trump’s thinking.
Whether it is incompetence, defensiveness, cluelessness or a self-interested desire to conceal the extent of the virus’s spread, Trump has continued to insist that testing, which has been lagging since the get-go, is going perfectly. In fact, at Wednesday’s afternoon’s briefing, he suggested there might be too much.
That elicited a marvelous exchange on CNN between anchor Don Lemon – who has been one of the most persistent and outraged TV proponents of more testing – and Daniel Dale, the long-suffering fact-checker extraordinaire.
Lemon played a clip of Trump insisting that “we are the king of testing” and that “we’re doing more testing I think than probably any of the governors even want.”
Dale calmly explained: “There is no governor to my knowledge who has complained that the federal government is doing more testing than they want. I don’t even know if that’s possible in a pandemic.”
Trump has a particularly poor track record when it comes to predictions – from his early forecast that the virus would disappear “within a couple of days,” to his assurances last month that it would “miraculously go away,” to his recent, constant insistence that there is “a lot of light at the end of the tunnel.”
Trump’s anticipated Easter Sunday reopening day has come and gone, as has his March 31 prediction that after a “very tough two weeks,” things would “get better all of a sudden… like a burst of light.”
And his promises – notably of more testing, including a Google-built website directing people to dozens of drive-through testing sites in big-box parking lots – have come to naught.
Cynicism is the order of the day. Here’s Jeremy Konyndyk, an expert in outbreak preparedness at the Center for Global Development, on CNBC on Thursday:
I’m not putting any stock in any reports of what may be coming on testing until we actually see it come one line and we see it work. We have been hearing… miracles are soon to arrive on testing. We’ve been hearing that for more than a month, since that Rose Garden event with all of the CEOs from the private sector promising great things which a month later has still not materialized. We are stuck at the level of around 150,000 to 160,000 tests a day. We’ve been there for weeks. We haven’t budged. Meanwhile, the case counts over that period have grown dramatically. So compared to the level of cases, we’re actually losing ground on testing. Until testing actually begins to come online at scale we are not ready to reopen because we don’t really know how many cases there are. Not in Georgia, and not anywhere else. Not for real.
The role of the press corps
In an essay in the Intercept, Pulitzer-Prize winning former New York Times reporter James Risen wrote on Wednesday that “some of Trump’s most important enablers are the reporters in the White House press corps.” He continued:
Instead of ignoring his lies and outrageous statements, they dutifully cover his Covid-19 press conferences and tweets as if they were the serious, coherent statements of a genuine national leader. In the process, they are aiding and abetting Trump’s disinformation campaign, which could result in thousands of additional and needless deaths.
I’ve argued there’s a better way, and that White House reporters could perform a public service if they aggressively confronted Trump with facts and with the consensus view of public-health experts.
They could also summarize a powerful New York Times opinion column by Aaron E. Carroll, a professor of pediatrics at Indiana University School of Medicine, in which he explains that the assumption that the infections will go down as fast as it came up is, unfortunately, magical thinking. Carroll writes:
Leaders are overestimating how far they’ve come, and they’re underestimating what it will take to manage Covid-19 in a more close-to-normal world. Failure to properly prepare will either result in a surge of infections and all the negative health and health care system ramifications that come with it, or a second round of sheltering in place much sooner than anyone expects. Neither is a good outcome.
The press corps could also call more attention to how Trump’s singular focus seems to be on what will help him politically – namely getting the economy going again. And they could contrast his approach with those of other leaders.
Gourevitch, the pollster, concludes that one big reason the public doesn’t trust Trump on issues like reopening is that they see it primarily as a public-health issue rather than an economic one.
Given the President's disregard for solving the health crisis, it's no surprise that the President's rating continue to decline. Trump's health care approval is severely under water. Over the last month we've seen that rating go from -2 to -16. pic.twitter.com/fckr1aDAS8 — Nick Gourevitch (@nickgourevitch) April 23, 2020
As I’ve noted before, over on the West Coast, California Gov. Gavin Newsom is a useful point of comparison.
Phil Willon and Taryn Luna write in the Los Angeles Times that Newsom on Wednesday said that increased testing is needed before he reaches any conclusions about when it’s safe to relax stay-at-home orders – and he announced new initiatives complete with metrics.
The new initiatives would substantially increase California’s coronavirus testing capabilities, which currently average 14,500 tests a day among all public and private labs. The Newsom administration’s target is 25,000 tests a day by the end of April and up to 80,000 daily tests in the near future.
That comes after Newsom last week set conditions for reopening that don’t focus so much on whether cases are trending down – like Trump’s guidelines do – but on whether his state is prepared to keep them trending down once it reopens.
Finally, the White House press corps has now been warned that Trump intends to flood his briefings with statistics in an attempt to show the nation’s readiness. That creates an obligation for reporters to put those numbers in context, and hold Trump accountable to reasonable metrics — which if he doesn’t set, someone else should set for him.


presswatchers--2020-04-24--Washington press corps covers up Trump’s profound stupidity

Presented with incontrovertible evidence that Donald Trump is stupid and clueless and that the American people should not follow his advice , reporters and editors in America ’ s top newsrooms averted their eyes .
Home delivery subscribers to the Washington Post , for instance , wouldn ’ t have a clue that Trump on Thursday evening proposed injecting patients with disinfectants to see if they would kill the coronavirus in lungs like they do on the kitchen counter .
There was no mention of it in the print edition .
Yes , Trump actually said , after hearing how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on surfaces , “ is there a way we can do something like that , by injection inside or almost a cleaning ?
Because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs .
So it would be interesting to check that.
” Is there a stupider , more dangerous thing he could possibly say ?
Could he possibly give a clearer indication that he is manifestly unfit to lead the nation during a public-health crisis ?
Small children know better than this .
But the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was headlined : “ Trump showcases idea heat , humidity could help fight virus , ” and only noted Trump ’ s disinfectant-injecting suggestion in passing .
Politico ’ s Brianna Ehley led with the news that Trump “ touted new research from his Department of Homeland Security suggesting sunlight , heat and humidity could kill the coronavirus.
” When she eventually quoted Trump on infecting disinfectant , there was no context , no rebuttal , no explanation .
At Reuters , Steve Holland and Andy Sullivan wrote about the new research and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be interpreted cautiously , but also claimed vindication for previously suggesting that the coronavirus might recede in summer.
” They used his “ injection ” quote as kicker at the end of their story , with no comment .
And then there ’ s the New York Times .
An early version of the article by William J .
Broad and Dan Levin ( seen here as published by a client of its wire service ) directly addressed Trump ’ s suggestions – but cast them as a case of Trump and “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Here , believe it or not , is their initial lead : President Donald Trump has long pinned his hopes on the powers of sunlight to defeat the COVID-19 virus .
On Thursday , he returned to that theme at the daily White House coronavirus briefing , bringing in a top administration scientist to back up his assertions and eagerly theorizing — dangerously , in the view of some experts — about the powers of sunlight , ultraviolet light and household disinfectants to kill the coronavirus .
After the scientist , William Bryan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Department of Homeland Security , told the briefing that the government had tested how sunlight and disinfectants — including bleach and alcohol — can kill the coronavirus on surfaces in as little as 30 seconds , an excited Trump returned to the lectern .
“ Supposing we hit the body with a tremendous — whether it ’ s ultraviolet or just very powerful light , ” Trump said .
“ And I think you said that hasn ’ t been checked , but we ’ re going to test it ?
” he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had returned to his seat .
“ And then I said , supposing you brought the light inside the body , either through the skin or some other way.
” Apparently reassured that the tests he was proposing would take place , Trump then theorized about the possible medical benefits of disinfectants in the fight against the virus .
At that point , the authors finally added some serious caveats : that “ disinfectants can kill not only microbes but humans ” ; that some of Trump ’ s earlier medical suggestions have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that emergency management officials quickly warned against them .
And the later version of the article made it clear from the get-go that household disinfectant “ would be dangerous if put inside the body.
” But this tweet ( which the Times deleted Friday morning ) will long be remembered as a quintessential example of bothesidesism — false equivalence that gives two sides equal credence even when one is dangerously wrong .
Among the responses on Twitter : Not all the mainstream coverage was restrained .
Stephen Collinson wrote for CNN , under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ salesman , is peddling dangerous cures for coronavirus ” : A later version of the AP story led with the warning from the parent company of Lysol “ that its products should not be used internally to treat COVID-19 after President Donald Trump wondered about the prospect during a White House briefing.
” One Friday morning Washington Post online column , Power Up , failed miserably , describing Trump ’ s dangerously stupid suggestions as “ medical musings.
” But another , Morning Mix , appropriately headlined the fact that “ Trump asked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the coronavirus inside the body .
Doctors answered : ‘ People will die.
’ ” The media tweets were where it really got hot : The single most powerful media commentary , however , had to be the tweet by CNN producer Daniel Lewis , showing Deborah Birx – who has emerged as a reliable Trump defender but is , nevertheless , a medical doctor — flinching as Trump spoke .
Despite how easily they got off in the mainstream press , the White House – backed by right-wing media – is complaining @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany issued a statement saying : “ President Trump has repeatedly said that Americans should consult with medical doctors regarding coronavirus treatment , a point that he emphasized again during yesterday ’ s briefing .
Leave it to the media to irresponsibly take President Trump out of context and run with negative headlines.
” Fox News led its website Friday morning with a story headlined Media erupt over Trump comments on disinfectant as coronavirus cure : Here ’ s what he said .
What he said , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fuller quotes from the transcript : THE PRESIDENT : So I asked Bill a question that probably some of you are thinking of , if you ’ re totally into that world , which I find to be very interesting .
So , supposing we hit the body with a tremendous — whether it ’ s ultraviolet or just very powerful light — and I think you said that that hasn ’ t been checked , but you ’ re going to test it .
And then I said , supposing you brought @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you can do either through the skin or in some other way , and I think you said you ’ re going to test that too .
It sounds interesting .
ACTING UNDER SECRETARY BRYAN : We ’ ll get to the right folks who could .
THE PRESIDENT : Right .
And then I see the disinfectant , where it knocks it out in a minute .
One minute .
And is there a way we can do something like that , by injection inside or almost a cleaning .
Because you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it does a tremendous number on the lungs .
So it would be interesting to check that .
So , that , you ’ re going to have to use medical doctors with .
But it sounds — it sounds interesting to me .
So we ’ ll see .
But the whole concept of the light , the way it kills it in one minute , that ’ s — that ’ s pretty powerful .
Trump was later asked to clarify : And later , an obviously incredulous Philip Rucker , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ correspondent , interjected with the obvious question – a polite version of , “ what the hell are you talking about ?
” : THE PRESIDENT : I would like you to speak to the medical doctors to see if there ’ s any way that you can apply light and heat to cure .
You know — but if you could .
And maybe you can , maybe you can ’ t .
Again , I say , maybe you can , maybe you can ’ t .
I ’ m not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like a person that has a good you know what .
THE PRESIDENT : Deborah , have you ever heard of that ?
The heat and the light , relative to certain viruses , yes , but relative to this virus ?
DR. BIRX : Not as a treatment .
I mean , certainly fever — DR. BIRX : — is a good thing .
When you have a fever , it helps your body respond .
But not as — I ’ ve not seen heat or ( inaudible ) .
THE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a great thing to look at .
I mean , you know .
Okay ?
Q But respectfully , sir , you ’ re the President .
And people tuning into these briefings , they want to get information and guidance and want to know what to do .
Q They ’ re not looking for a rumor .
THE PRESIDENT : Hey , Phil .
I ’ m the President and you ’ re fake news .
And you know what I ’ ll say to you ?
I ’ ll say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well .
THE PRESIDENT : I know you well .
Because I know the guy ; I see what he writes .
He ’ s a total faker .
THE PRESIDENT : So , are you ready ?
Are you ready ?
Are you ready ?
It ’ s just a suggestion from a brilliant lab by a very , very smart , perhaps brilliant , man .
He ’ s talking about sun .
He ’ s talking about heat .
And you see the numbers .
So that ’ s it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I ’ m just here to present talent .
I ’ m here to present ideas , because we want ideas to get rid of this thing .
And if heat is good and if sunlight is good , that ’ s a great thing as far as I ’ m concerned .
Trump tried to distance himself from those comments Friday morning , telling reporters : “ I was asking sarcastically to reporters just like you to see what would happen.
” But that ’ s just what he says after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he shouldn ’ t have said .
It wasn ’ t sarcastic , and reporters shouldn ’ t quote him credulously about that .
It was stupid , and they should say so .

Presented with incontrovertible evidence that Donald Trump is stupid and clueless and that the American people should not follow his advice, reporters and editors in America’s top newsrooms averted their eyes.
Home delivery subscribers to the Washington Post, for instance, wouldn’t have a clue that Trump on Thursday evening proposed injecting patients with disinfectants to see if they would kill the coronavirus in lungs like they do on the kitchen counter. There was no mention of it in the print edition.
Yes, Trump actually said, after hearing how bleach and rubbing alcohol kill the virus on surfaces, “is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning? Because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs. So it would be interesting to check that.”
Is there a stupider, more dangerous thing he could possibly say? Could he possibly give a clearer indication that he is manifestly unfit to lead the nation during a public-health crisis? Small children know better than this.
But the initial Associated Press story by Kevin Freking was headlined: “Trump showcases idea heat, humidity could help fight virus,” and only noted Trump’s disinfectant-injecting suggestion in passing.
Politico’s Brianna Ehley led with the news that Trump “touted new research from his Department of Homeland Security suggesting sunlight, heat and humidity could kill the coronavirus.” When she eventually quoted Trump on infecting disinfectant, there was no context, no rebuttal, no explanation.
At Reuters, Steve Holland and Andy Sullivan wrote about the new research and how “Trump said the findings should be interpreted cautiously, but also claimed vindication for previously suggesting that the coronavirus might recede in summer.” They used his “injection” quote as kicker at the end of their story, with no comment.
And then there’s the New York Times.
An early version of the article by William J. Broad and Dan Levin (seen here as published by a client of its wire service) directly addressed Trump’s suggestions – but cast them as a case of Trump and “some experts” being in disagreement.
Here, believe it or not, is their initial lead:
President Donald Trump has long pinned his hopes on the powers of sunlight to defeat the COVID-19 virus. On Thursday, he returned to that theme at the daily White House coronavirus briefing, bringing in a top administration scientist to back up his assertions and eagerly theorizing — dangerously, in the view of some experts — about the powers of sunlight, ultraviolet light and household disinfectants to kill the coronavirus. After the scientist, William Bryan, the head of science at the Department of Homeland Security, told the briefing that the government had tested how sunlight and disinfectants — including bleach and alcohol — can kill the coronavirus on surfaces in as little as 30 seconds, an excited Trump returned to the lectern. “Supposing we hit the body with a tremendous — whether it’s ultraviolet or just very powerful light,” Trump said. “And I think you said that hasn’t been checked, but we’re going to test it?” he added, turning to Bryan, who had returned to his seat. “And then I said, supposing you brought the light inside the body, either through the skin or some other way.” Apparently reassured that the tests he was proposing would take place, Trump then theorized about the possible medical benefits of disinfectants in the fight against the virus.
At that point, the authors finally added some serious caveats: that “disinfectants can kill not only microbes but humans”; that some of Trump’s earlier medical suggestions have had “disastrous effects”; and that emergency management officials quickly warned against them.
And the later version of the article made it clear from the get-go that household disinfectant “would be dangerous if put inside the body.”
But this tweet (which the Times deleted Friday morning) will long be remembered as a quintessential example of bothesidesism — false equivalence that gives two sides equal credence even when one is dangerously wrong.
Among the responses on Twitter:
they found a way to #BothSides drinking bleach https://t.co/ZlNiksMg7Z — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 24, 2020
Holy shit, they did it. They actually ran the “Trump says the sun rises in the West, some experts disagree” headline we’ve been joking about for three years. They’ve transcended parody. https://t.co/K0FXFlsizA — John Rogers (@jonrog1) April 24, 2020
Not all the mainstream coverage was restrained.
Stephen Collinson wrote for CNN, under the headline “Trump, ever the salesman, is peddling dangerous cures for coronavirus”:
He’s marketed steaks and real estate, board games and vodka, but nothing the incorrigible salesman has tried to hawk measures up to his latest routine as he speculated on a possible new cure for Covid-19.… Trump’s comments made his extravagant claims for the unproven use of the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine seem peer-reviewed by comparison.
A later version of the AP story led with the warning from the parent company of Lysol “that its products should not be used internally to treat COVID-19 after President Donald Trump wondered about the prospect during a White House briefing.”
One Friday morning Washington Post online column, Power Up, failed miserably, describing Trump’s dangerously stupid suggestions as “medical musings.” But another, Morning Mix, appropriately headlined the fact that “Trump asked if disinfectants could be injected to kill the coronavirus inside the body. Doctors answered: ‘People will die.’”
The media tweets were where it really got hot:
MSNBC anchor Lawrence O’Donnell:
We knew he was insane before he said this. The disappointment is that the experts present didn’t have the courage to forcefully repudiate it. They didn’t jump up & warn America that what we just heard was homicidally insane. https://t.co/AbUTW7YgGA — Lawrence O'Donnell (@Lawrence) April 24, 2020
Vox correspondent Ian Milhiser:
Somewhere in the bowels of the New York Times, two of its top editors are congratulating each other for somehow finding a way to #BothSides injecting bleach. https://t.co/TlwSi2axwf — Ian Millhiser (@imillhiser) April 24, 2020
American Independent writer Oliver Willis:
notice how no news outlets simply say "the president is crazy and he is offering up crazy solutions during a pandemic that will kill even more people than his already crazy and deranged handling of the virus has caused thus far"? its all the truth. but you don't see it. — Oliver Willis (@owillis) April 24, 2020
The single most powerful media commentary, however, had to be the tweet by CNN producer Daniel Lewis, showing Deborah Birx – who has emerged as a reliable Trump defender but is, nevertheless, a medical doctor — flinching as Trump spoke.
Here is Dr. Birx's reaction when President Trump asks his science advisor to study using UV light on the human body and injecting disinfectant to fight the coronavirus. pic.twitter.com/MVno5X7JMA — Daniel Lewis (@Daniel_Lewis3) April 24, 2020
White House isn’t satisfied
Despite how easily they got off in the mainstream press, the White House – backed by right-wing media – is complaining about the negativity of the coverage:
New White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany issued a statement saying: “President Trump has repeatedly said that Americans should consult with medical doctors regarding coronavirus treatment, a point that he emphasized again during yesterday’s briefing. Leave it to the media to irresponsibly take President Trump out of context and run with negative headlines.”
Fox News led its website Friday morning with a story headlined Media erupt over Trump comments on disinfectant as coronavirus cure: Here’s what he said.
What he said, however, is really pretty damning. Fuller quotes from the transcript:
THE PRESIDENT: So I asked Bill a question that probably some of you are thinking of, if you’re totally into that world, which I find to be very interesting. So, supposing we hit the body with a tremendous — whether it’s ultraviolet or just very powerful light — and I think you said that that hasn’t been checked, but you’re going to test it. And then I said, supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way, and I think you said you’re going to test that too. It sounds interesting. ACTING UNDER SECRETARY BRYAN: We’ll get to the right folks who could. THE PRESIDENT: Right. And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning. Because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs. So it would be interesting to check that. So, that, you’re going to have to use medical doctors with. But it sounds — it sounds interesting to me. So we’ll see. But the whole concept of the light, the way it kills it in one minute, that’s — that’s pretty powerful.
Trump was later asked to clarify:
Q But I — just, can I ask about — the President mentioned the idea of cleaners, like bleach and isopropyl alcohol you mentioned. There’s no scenario that that could be injected into a person, is there? I mean — ACTING UNDER SECRETARY BRYAN: No, I’m here to talk about the findings that we had in the study. We won’t do that within that lab and our lab. So — THE PRESIDENT: It wouldn’t be through injection. We’re talking about through almost a cleaning, sterilization of an area. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t work. But it certainly has a big effect if it’s on a stationary object.
And later, an obviously incredulous Philip Rucker, the Washington Post’s White House correspondent, interjected with the obvious question – a polite version of, “what the hell are you talking about?”:
THE PRESIDENT: I would like you to speak to the medical doctors to see if there’s any way that you can apply light and heat to cure. You know — but if you could. And maybe you can, maybe you can’t. Again, I say, maybe you can, maybe you can’t. I’m not a doctor. But I’m like a person that has a good you know what. Q But, sir, you’re the President. THE PRESIDENT: Deborah, have you ever heard of that? The heat and the light, relative to certain viruses, yes, but relative to this virus? DR. BIRX: Not as a treatment. I mean, certainly fever — THE PRESIDENT: Yeah. DR. BIRX: — is a good thing. When you have a fever, it helps your body respond. But not as — I’ve not seen heat or (inaudible). THE PRESIDENT: I think it’s a great thing to look at. I mean, you know. Okay? Q But respectfully, sir, you’re the President. And people tuning into these briefings, they want to get information and guidance and want to know what to do. THE PRESIDENT: Hey — hey, Phil. Q They’re not looking for a rumor. THE PRESIDENT: Hey, Phil. I’m the President and you’re fake news. And you know what I’ll say to you? I’ll say it very nicely. I know you well. Q Why do you say that? THE PRESIDENT: I know you well. Because I know the guy; I see what he writes. He’s a total faker. Q He’s a good reporter. THE PRESIDENT: So, are you ready? Are you ready? Are you ready? It’s just a suggestion from a brilliant lab by a very, very smart, perhaps brilliant, man. He’s talking about sun. He’s talking about heat. And you see the numbers. So that’s it; that’s all I have. I’m just here to present talent. I’m here to present ideas, because we want ideas to get rid of this thing. And if heat is good and if sunlight is good, that’s a great thing as far as I’m concerned.
Trump tried to distance himself from those comments Friday morning, telling reporters: “I was asking sarcastically to reporters just like you to see what would happen.”
But that’s just what he says after he says something that even he realizes he shouldn’t have said.
It wasn’t sarcastic, and reporters shouldn’t quote him credulously about that. It was stupid, and they should say so.


presswatchers--2020-04-28--Trump’s idea of reopening schools before summer is more dangerous than bleach

Donald Trump ’ s suggestion that some states rush to reopen schools before summer is not as obviously stupid as his idea about injecting bleach into the human body to fight the coronavirus – almost nothing could be — but it may well end up being more dangerous , if any governors listen to him .
The consistent theme here is that Trump is always looking for an easy way out of this crisis – a quick fix , a miraculous decline , something to swallow or inject that will make it all go away — and there isn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a lot of inspired leadership , a lot of hard work , and a massive WWII-level supply-chain initiative .
Now Trump has evidently seized on the fact that children seem relatively impervious to Covid-19 .
So why not , he asks , send them back to school ?
Well , there ’ s a reason that scientists sometimes refer to children as “ little vectors.
” As any parent know , a school is a petri dish for respiratory illness .
Kids spread germs to each other — and then bring them home @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , even if the kids don ’ t get particularly ill , their parents , their grandparents and – most directly – teachers and staff are put at risk .
And so are the people who make contact with the people the kids have infected .
That ’ s why shutting schools down was so important to slowing the spread of the virus .
And that ’ s why public-health experts generally seem to think that schools should only reopen when the community as a whole has the spread more or less under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to families and to the economy , reopening school is premature as long as there ’ s no way to make sure that parents aren ’ t sending their children into the middle of an outbreak that will then blow back into their homes and communities .
At a news conference on Monday that was typically full of hyperbole , self-praise and misinformation , Trump said that having schools “ open up ” even briefly “ would be a good thing.
” His reasoning ?
“ Because , as you see , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after , young people seem to do very well .
Young people seem to do very well.
” Earlier on Monday , he had told governors on a phone call that “ Some of you might start thinking about school openings , because a lot of people are wanting to have the school openings.
” He wildly minimized the significance of such a move .
“ It ’ s not a big subject , ” he told the governors .
“ Young children have done very well in this disaster that we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ needs to put this talk in context , by talking to experts and reading the literature .
A recent report from a blue-ribbon panel convened by the Edmund J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard establishes four phases in reopening society .
It recommends holding off on school reopenings until Phase 4 — and we ’ re not even in Phase 1 yet .
“ We estimate that the economy has the capacity to reach Phase 4 by early August if fully mobilized in this direction , ” the report says – meaning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contact tracing , isolation , and quarantine , the likes of which the federal government has not seriously contemplated .
The draft guidelines for reopening from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , which are floating around Washington , include recommendations for schools , such as putting students ’ desks 6 feet apart , staggering arrival and departure times , and closing playgrounds .
But the CDC warns those recommendations are only for communities “ with confidence that the incidence of infection is genuinely low.
” A 2010 study of the 2009 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ closures appeared to make the outbreak worse , and emphasized “ the importance of keeping schools closed until the epidemic curve is far past its peak.
” Premature reopening while still in the middle of the epidemic allowed “ a whole population of susceptible students to mix and be infected and extend the length of the epidemic.
” The 43 states that have ordered or recommended schools remain closed this spring are having a hard enough time figuring out how to reopen in the fall .
Laura Meckler , Valerie Strauss and Moriah @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A petition from a New York teachers ’ union demands “ protocols and procedures in place to ensure the safety and health of the staff and students , ” starting with “ Widespread access to coronavirus testing to regularly check that people are negative or have immunity.
” Colleges and universities are wrestling with similar issues .
Christina Paxson , the president of Brown University , wrote in a New York Times opinion column on Sunday : From Paxson ’ s view in Rhode Island , which has tested more residents per capita @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actually seem possible .
But there ’ s no way under anything like the current federal trajectory that campuses across the nation will be prepared to do that .
It would take a dramatic shift , starting at the White House .
And no such shift is in evidence Trump on Monday presented what he called a “ blueprint ” for increasing testing capacity , but it was just another exercise in blame-shifting and avoiding responsibility .
In a reflection of Trump ’ s ever-diminishing credibility , the political media called him out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the New York Times that Trump ’ s proposal still runs far short of what most public health experts say is necessary : Vox ’ s German Lopez wrote that it “ read a lot like an abdication.
” Mike DeBonis , Chris Mooney and Juliet Eilperin wrote in the Washington Post that the blueprint “ leaves the onus on states to develop their own plans and rapid-response programs ” even as “ health and economic experts said the current patchwork of testing efforts is insufficient to allow the economy to reopen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CBS Evening News that “ this new plan does not provide specifics about the supply chain or a roadmap for growing testing capacity , and the burden remains largely on the states.
” Kristen Welker reported on NBC Nightly News , “ The president mostly laid out steps that his administration has already taken to do testing.
” The Post reporters also noted that , in a letter to Congress , “ a bipartisan cadre of public health officials led by former Trump Food and Drug Administration commissioner Scott Gottlieb and Andy Slavitt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Barack Obama , warned that ‘ current testing capacity and accuracy must be improved ’ .
” California Gov .
Gavin Newsom on Tuesday raised the possibility of opening schools there not before summer – but before September .
“ I think we might want to consider getting that school year moved up a little bit , ” he said , suggesting possibly as early as late July .
But like so much else right now , the opening of schools seems to depend most of all on an availability of testing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ level , that seems impossible as long as the Trump administration fails to act .
And Trump continues to act as if thing will work out just fine somehow .
He said Tuesday afternoon : “ I think what happens is it ’ s going to go away .
This is going to go away .
”

Donald Trump’s suggestion that some states rush to reopen schools before summer is not as obviously stupid as his idea about injecting bleach into the human body to fight the coronavirus – almost nothing could be — but it may well end up being more dangerous, if any governors listen to him.
The consistent theme here is that Trump is always looking for an easy way out of this crisis – a quick fix, a miraculous decline, something to swallow or inject that will make it all go away — and there isn’t one.
The only solution involves a lot of inspired leadership, a lot of hard work, and a massive WWII-level supply-chain initiative.
Now Trump has evidently seized on the fact that children seem relatively impervious to Covid-19. So why not, he asks, send them back to school?
Well, there’s a reason that scientists sometimes refer to children as “little vectors.”
As any parent know, a school is a petri dish for respiratory illness. Kids spread germs to each other — and then bring them home. As far as Covid-19 is concerned, even if the kids don’t get particularly ill, their parents, their grandparents and – most directly – teachers and staff are put at risk. And so are the people who make contact with the people the kids have infected.
That’s why shutting schools down was so important to slowing the spread of the virus. And that’s why public-health experts generally seem to think that schools should only reopen when the community as a whole has the spread more or less under control.
As crucial as it is to families and to the economy, reopening school is premature as long as there’s no way to make sure that parents aren’t sending their children into the middle of an outbreak that will then blow back into their homes and communities.
What Trump said
At a news conference on Monday that was typically full of hyperbole, self-praise and misinformation, Trump said that having schools “open up” even briefly “would be a good thing.”
His reasoning? “Because, as you see, in terms of what this vicious virus goes after, young people seem to do very well. Young people seem to do very well.”
Earlier on Monday, he had told governors on a phone call that “Some of you might start thinking about school openings, because a lot of people are wanting to have the school openings.”
He wildly minimized the significance of such a move. “It’s not a big subject,” he told the governors. “Young children have done very well in this disaster that we’ve all gone through.”
When should schools reopen?
The media needs to put this talk in context, by talking to experts and reading the literature.
A recent report from a blue-ribbon panel convened by the Edmund J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard establishes four phases in reopening society. It recommends holding off on school reopenings until Phase 4 — and we’re not even in Phase 1 yet.
“We estimate that the economy has the capacity to reach Phase 4 by early August if fully mobilized in this direction,” the report says – meaning after months of massively scaled-up testing, contact tracing, isolation, and quarantine, the likes of which the federal government has not seriously contemplated.
The draft guidelines for reopening from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which are floating around Washington, include recommendations for schools, such as putting students’ desks 6 feet apart, staggering arrival and departure times, and closing playgrounds.
But the CDC warns those recommendations are only for communities “with confidence that the incidence of infection is genuinely low.”
A 2010 study of the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic found that short school closures appeared to make the outbreak worse, and emphasized “the importance of keeping schools closed until the epidemic curve is far past its peak.” Premature reopening while still in the middle of the epidemic allowed “a whole population of susceptible students to mix and be infected and extend the length of the epidemic.”
The 43 states that have ordered or recommended schools remain closed this spring are having a hard enough time figuring out how to reopen in the fall.
Laura Meckler, Valerie Strauss and Moriah Balingit wrote in the Washington Post:
Amid the planning, there’s plenty of skepticism. Teachers, their unions and some administrators fear political pressure will force a return before it is safe. Some dismiss the social distancing ideas under consideration as a joke, saying it would be nearly impossible to prevent virus transmission in a school…. It won’t be safe to reopen until there is “massive and accurate” testing, as well as contact tracing and isolation for those who are infected, said Lily Eskelsen García, president of the National Education Association, the country’s largest union. She is frustrated by what she sees as inappropriate pressure from Trump and worries it will lead to bad decisions. “We need evidence it’s safe for those kids to go back.”
A petition from a New York teachers’ union demands “protocols and procedures in place to ensure the safety and health of the staff and students,” starting with “Widespread access to coronavirus testing to regularly check that people are negative or have immunity.”
Colleges and universities are wrestling with similar issues. Christina Paxson, the president of Brown University, wrote in a New York Times opinion column on Sunday:
The reopening of college and university campuses in the fall should be a national priority. Institutions should develop public health plans now that build on three basic elements of controlling the spread of infection: test, trace and separate.
But, she wrote:
Testing is an absolute prerequisite. All campuses must be able to conduct rapid testing for the coronavirus for all students, when they first arrive on campus and at regular intervals throughout the year. Testing only those with symptoms will not be sufficient. We now know that many people who have the disease are asymptomatic. Regular testing is the only way to prevent the disease from spreading silently through dormitories and classrooms.
From Paxson’s view in Rhode Island, which has tested more residents per capita than any other state, that may actually seem possible. But there’s no way under anything like the current federal trajectory that campuses across the nation will be prepared to do that. It would take a dramatic shift, starting at the White House.
And no such shift is in evidence
Trump on Monday presented what he called a “blueprint” for increasing testing capacity, but it was just another exercise in blame-shifting and avoiding responsibility.
In a reflection of Trump’s ever-diminishing credibility, the political media called him out on it.
Sheryl Gay Stolberg wrote in the New York Times that Trump’s proposal still runs far short of what most public health experts say is necessary:
Mr. Trump’s announcement in the Rose Garden came after weeks of him insisting, inaccurately, that the nation’s testing capability “is fully sufficient to begin opening up the country,” as he said on April 18. Numerous public health experts say that is untrue, and Mr. Trump’s plan may do little to fix it.… Rather than one coordinated federal response, the Trump administration has been engaging on an ad hoc basis as states take the lead.
Vox’s German Lopez wrote that it “read a lot like an abdication.”
Mike DeBonis, Chris Mooney and Juliet Eilperin wrote in the Washington Post that the blueprint “leaves the onus on states to develop their own plans and rapid-response programs” even as “health and economic experts said the current patchwork of testing efforts is insufficient to allow the economy to reopen safely.”
Weijia Jiang reported on the CBS Evening News that “this new plan does not provide specifics about the supply chain or a roadmap for growing testing capacity, and the burden remains largely on the states.”
Kristen Welker reported on NBC Nightly News, “The president mostly laid out steps that his administration has already taken to do testing.”
The Post reporters also noted that, in a letter to Congress, “a bipartisan cadre of public health officials led by former Trump Food and Drug Administration commissioner Scott Gottlieb and Andy Slavitt, a onetime senior health official to President Barack Obama, warned that ‘current testing capacity and accuracy must be improved’.”
So what’s next?
California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Tuesday raised the possibility of opening schools there not before summer – but before September. “I think we might want to consider getting that school year moved up a little bit,” he said, suggesting possibly as early as late July.
But like so much else right now, the opening of schools seems to depend most of all on an availability of testing, either at the community or school level, that seems impossible as long as the Trump administration fails to act.
And Trump continues to act as if thing will work out just fine somehow. He said Tuesday afternoon: “I think what happens is it’s going to go away. This is going to go away.”