truthout--2020-05-19--Roe of “Roe v. Wade” Says Christian Right Paid Her to Be Anti-Choice Mouthpiece

Norma McCorvey probably isn ’ t a household name across most of the United States , but she was instrumental in a Supreme Court ruling most Americans are well-aware of : Roe v. Wade .
In that decision , lawyers for McCorvey , who was listed as “ Jane Roe ” in briefings , successfully argued that abortion rights should be recognized across the entirety of the United States of America .
Though efforts have been made over the years to limit the scope of that ruling ( including during the coronavirus crisis ) , the right to have an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ McCorvey ’ s story didn ’ t end there , however , and saw her crossing sides later in her life .
In 1995 McCorvey announced she had changed her mind to the dismay of many in the pro-choice movement .
Joining an anti-choice crusade , led by Reverend Rob Schenck and Reverent Flip Benham at the time , McCorvey renounced her support for abortion rights and said she was a born-again Christian who was pro-life .
McCorvey , who was also a lesbian , said she was renouncing that part of her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ passed away in 2017 , but not before sitting down with filmmakers to tell her whole story .
In AKA Jane Roe , the FX documentary that takes a deeper look at McCorvey ’ s life , a huge revelation is made in the final 20 minutes of the film : her renunciation of the pro-choice movement was entirely fabricated .
“ This is my deathbed confession , ” McCorvey says in the film , revealing that she didn ’ t really change her views at all .
It was “ all an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by filmmakers whether she was used “ as a trophy ” by anti-choice movement , McCorvey responded in the affirmative .
“ Of course .
I was the Big Fish , ” she said Filmmakers also asked McCorvey if she was using the anti-choice movement for her own benefit .
“ I think it was a mutual thing , ” she explained .
“ I took their money and they took me out in front of the cameras and told me what to say .
That ’ s what I ’ d say.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ McCorvey in the 1990s took differing views on her statements .
Benham maintains they did not pay McCorvey for her conversion to their side , but Schenck has said otherwise , explaining “ she was actually on the payroll , as it were.
” Schenck himself had a change of heart about the issue of abortion , too .
In a 2018 interview , he explained that he ’ s tempered his views significantly , arguing against movements to make the practice illegal .
“ This is not a question for politicians , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ When your end goal is a political one , you will , without exception , exploit the pain and the suffering and the agony of those who face the issue in their daily reality , in their real life.
” In a recent tweet about the documentary , Schenck expressed originally feeling “ conflicted ” about being interviewed , but said he was “ glad ” he ended up agreeing to speak in the film .
“ You ’ ll see me express deep regret for how movement leaders like me treated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Roe v. Wade , ” he added .
Not every voice on the pro-choice side of the argument was happy to hear McCorvey ’ s confession in the film .
Texas-based abortion rights activist Charlotte Taft who also appears in the documentary .
When confronted by filmmakers about McCorvey ’ s revelation , Taft expressed betrayal by her former friend .
“ That just really hurts because it ’ s big stakes .
It ’ s just really big stakes , ” Taft said .

McCorvey was paid more than $450,000 in “benevolent gifts” to be an anti-abortion spokesperson.
Norma McCorvey probably isn’t a household name across most of the United States, but she was instrumental in a Supreme Court ruling most Americans are well-aware of: Roe v. Wade.
In that decision, lawyers for McCorvey, who was listed as “Jane Roe” in briefings, successfully argued that abortion rights should be recognized across the entirety of the United States of America. Though efforts have been made over the years to limit the scope of that ruling (including during the coronavirus crisis), the right to have an abortion has remained intact ever since.
McCorvey’s story didn’t end there, however, and saw her crossing sides later in her life. In 1995 McCorvey announced she had changed her mind to the dismay of many in the pro-choice movement.
Joining an anti-choice crusade, led by Reverend Rob Schenck and Reverent Flip Benham at the time, McCorvey renounced her support for abortion rights and said she was a born-again Christian who was pro-life. McCorvey, who was also a lesbian, said she was renouncing that part of her life, too.
The anti-choice activist passed away in 2017, but not before sitting down with filmmakers to tell her whole story. In AKA Jane Roe, the FX documentary that takes a deeper look at McCorvey’s life, a huge revelation is made in the final 20 minutes of the film: her renunciation of the pro-choice movement was entirely fabricated.
“This is my deathbed confession,” McCorvey says in the film, revealing that she didn’t really change her views at all. It was “all an act,” she said.
Asked by filmmakers whether she was used “as a trophy” by anti-choice movement, McCorvey responded in the affirmative. “Of course. I was the Big Fish,” she said
Filmmakers also asked McCorvey if she was using the anti-choice movement for her own benefit. “I think it was a mutual thing,” she explained. “I took their money and they took me out in front of the cameras and told me what to say. That’s what I’d say.”
The two clergymen who worked with McCorvey in the 1990s took differing views on her statements. Benham maintains they did not pay McCorvey for her conversion to their side, but Schenck has said otherwise, explaining “she was actually on the payroll, as it were.”
AKA Jane Roe filmmakers uncovered $456,911 in payments called “benevolent gifts” made to McCorvey.
Schenck himself had a change of heart about the issue of abortion, too. In a 2018 interview, he explained that he’s tempered his views significantly, arguing against movements to make the practice illegal.
“This is not a question for politicians,” Schenck said then to NPR. “When your end goal is a political one, you will, without exception, exploit the pain and the suffering and the agony of those who face the issue in their daily reality, in their real life.”
In a recent tweet about the documentary, Schenck expressed originally feeling “conflicted” about being interviewed, but said he was “glad” he ended up agreeing to speak in the film. “You’ll see me express deep regret for how movement leaders like me treated Norma McCorvey, ‘Jane Roe’ of Roe v. Wade,” he added.
Not every voice on the pro-choice side of the argument was happy to hear McCorvey’s confession in the film. Texas-based abortion rights activist Charlotte Taft who also appears in the documentary. When confronted by filmmakers about McCorvey’s revelation, Taft expressed betrayal by her former friend.
“That just really hurts because it’s big stakes. It’s just really big stakes,” Taft said.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-05-19--Trump’s “VERY Promising” Vaccine Is at Least a Year Away, Leaked Memo Suggests

A leaked memo from the Pentagon suggests the Department of Defense does not hold the same optimistic tone that President Donald Trump does when it comes to how fast a vaccine for coronavirus could be developed .
The document , which is not the official view of the Pentagon , warns of a “ globally-persistent ” coronavirus environment in the U.S. for some time to come , and states that a vaccine likely won ’ t be available to the public until “ at least the summer of 2021.
” “ We have a long path ahead , with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” the memo states .
“ Therefore , we must now re-focus our attention on resuming critical missions , increasing levels of activity , and making necessary preparations should a significant resurgence of COVID-19 occur later this year.
” The memo was written by Kenneth Rapuano , assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense and global security , according to reporting from Task & Purpose , which first reported on the document ’ s existence .
While Rapuano was the initial author , the memo was written out as if to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s unclear if Esper has seen the document or not , or weighed in on its contents .
A spokeswoman at the Pentagon said the document was outdated , but wouldn ’ t say when it was specifically authored .
The memo is meant to update previous guidance issued by the Pentagon on April 1 , and was reportedly circulated among military services around the beginning of May .
The memo ’ s contents are a bleaker assessment of what the president has suggested might happen , especially with regard to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Last week Thursday , Trump tweeted that “ vaccine work is looking VERY promising , ” and that a vaccine for the disease could be available “ before [ the ] end [ of the ] year.
” On Friday , reporters at the White House were informed about “ Operation Warp Speed , ” an ambitious plan to “ manufacture and distribute a proven coronavirus vaccine as fast as possible , ” according to the president .
“ I want to see if we can do that very quickly .
When I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re looking to get it by the end of the year if we can , ” Trump said about the program .
“ Maybe before.
” Moncef Slaoui , a former pharmaceutical executive at Moderna , the company that ’ s working in conjunction with the government in developing a COVID-19 vaccine , was named by the president to lead Operation Warp Speed .
In his own comments about the vaccine ’ s development , he gave an assessment that was more in line with the Pentagon ’ s leaked memo than Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 12 to 18 months is already a very aggressive timeline , ” Slaoui said .
Slaoui himself was embroiled in a bit of controversy on Monday , after it was announced that the vaccine from Moderna had performed well in initial small-sample trials .
Stocks in Moderna responded positively from the news — and Slaoui appeared to benefit financially as a result .
On Friday , when trading on Wall Street closed for the weekend , the stock price for Moderna was around $ 66 per share .
On Monday at noon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 84 per share on news of the vaccine ’ s initial successes .
Slaoui still had millions of dollars in shares from Moderna even after he left the company to join the White House ’ s efforts on Operation Warp Speed .
In response to criticisms over him profiting from being on the project , the former Moderna executive announced he was selling off his shares , and donating the gains he made from the time the news was announced to his divestment , to cancer research .
Tal Zaks , Moderna @ @ @ @ @ @ @ optimism that a vaccine from the company could be made available by January .
But again , experts have cautioned against such thinking .
“ In the best of circumstances , we should have a vaccine — or let ’ s say vaccines — between 12 and 18 months , ” Stanley Plotkin , the individual credited with creating the rubella vaccine in the 1960s , told NBC News .
“ Whether those circumstances will be the best or not , we don ’ t know.
” Even if a vaccine is produced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s unclear that many Americans would be able to access it , as the White House has not made any guarantees on whether there would be universal access to the coronavirus vaccine .

The leaked Pentagon memo warns that a vaccine won’t likely become available until “at least the summer of 2021.”
A leaked memo from the Pentagon suggests the Department of Defense does not hold the same optimistic tone that President Donald Trump does when it comes to how fast a vaccine for coronavirus could be developed.
The document, which is not the official view of the Pentagon, warns of a “globally-persistent” coronavirus environment in the U.S. for some time to come, and states that a vaccine likely won’t be available to the public until “at least the summer of 2021.”
“We have a long path ahead, with the real possibility of a resurgence of COVID-19,” the memo states. “Therefore, we must now re-focus our attention on resuming critical missions, increasing levels of activity, and making necessary preparations should a significant resurgence of COVID-19 occur later this year.”
The memo was written by Kenneth Rapuano, assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense and global security, according to reporting from Task & Purpose, which first reported on the document’s existence. While Rapuano was the initial author, the memo was written out as if to be authored by Defense Secretary Mark Esper.
It’s unclear if Esper has seen the document or not, or weighed in on its contents. A spokeswoman at the Pentagon said the document was outdated, but wouldn’t say when it was specifically authored. The memo is meant to update previous guidance issued by the Pentagon on April 1, and was reportedly circulated among military services around the beginning of May.
The memo’s contents are a bleaker assessment of what the president has suggested might happen, especially with regard to the development of a coronavirus vaccine.
Last week Thursday, Trump tweeted that “vaccine work is looking VERY promising,” and that a vaccine for the disease could be available “before [the] end [of the] year.”
On Friday, reporters at the White House were informed about “Operation Warp Speed,” an ambitious plan to “manufacture and distribute a proven coronavirus vaccine as fast as possible,” according to the president.
“I want to see if we can do that very quickly. When I say ‘quickly,’ we’re looking to get it by the end of the year if we can,” Trump said about the program. “Maybe before.”
Moncef Slaoui, a former pharmaceutical executive at Moderna, the company that’s working in conjunction with the government in developing a COVID-19 vaccine, was named by the president to lead Operation Warp Speed. In his own comments about the vaccine’s development, he gave an assessment that was more in line with the Pentagon’s leaked memo than Trump’s rosy outlook.
“Frankly, 12 to 18 months is already a very aggressive timeline,” Slaoui said.
Slaoui himself was embroiled in a bit of controversy on Monday, after it was announced that the vaccine from Moderna had performed well in initial small-sample trials. Stocks in Moderna responded positively from the news — and Slaoui appeared to benefit financially as a result.
On Friday, when trading on Wall Street closed for the weekend, the stock price for Moderna was around $66 per share. On Monday at noon, the price jumped up to around $84 per share on news of the vaccine’s initial successes.
Slaoui still had millions of dollars in shares from Moderna even after he left the company to join the White House’s efforts on Operation Warp Speed. In response to criticisms over him profiting from being on the project, the former Moderna executive announced he was selling off his shares, and donating the gains he made from the time the news was announced to his divestment, to cancer research.
Tal Zaks, Moderna’s chief medical officer, expressed optimism that a vaccine from the company could be made available by January. But again, experts have cautioned against such thinking.
“In the best of circumstances, we should have a vaccine — or let’s say vaccines — between 12 and 18 months,” Stanley Plotkin, the individual credited with creating the rubella vaccine in the 1960s, told NBC News. “Whether those circumstances will be the best or not, we don’t know.”
Even if a vaccine is produced by the end of the year, it’s unclear that many Americans would be able to access it, as the White House has not made any guarantees on whether there would be universal access to the coronavirus vaccine.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-05-19--US Is Using Pandemic as an Excuse to Send Asylum Seekers Back Into Harm’s Way

Fernanda* doesn ’ t know what to do .
She fled Honduras with her husband and their toddler last year after death threats from gang members she says work with police officers in the family ’ s neighborhood to extort local businesses and workers .
They made it more than 1,500 miles north , hoping to seek asylum in the United States , where Fernanda ’ s husband has an uncle who could provide them housing and support .
“ We just want to be safe and work and contribute , ” Fernanda told Truthout .
The family stopped for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fernanda ’ s husband found temporary work .
The news they received from asylum seekers ahead of them at the border was worrisome and confusing .
People were being attacked .
Hondurans were being sent to Guatemala .
Sometimes no one could ask for asylum .
“ They are always changing the rules , ” Fernanda said .
For now , the family ’ s final leg of the route to the U.S. border is on hold .
They are just trying to stay healthy , as the novel coronavirus is rapidly spreading @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than 5,000 related deaths , according to government figures .
They still hope to be able to seek asylum in the U.S. at some point despite fears they could be deported to Honduras or sent to Guatemala .
The Trump administration began pushing its agenda of shutting down asylum in the U.S. right out of the gate , and COVID-19 has now provided a new justification .
Purportedly to protect public health , the government has essentially shut down asylum at the southern border with Mexico while the U.S. spreads the virus through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nations are currently in limbo , but the administration could begin sending people to a third country , Honduras , at any time .
In 2019 , the U.S. Department of Homeland Security signed a series of bilateral agreements with security officials in Guatemala , Honduras and El Salvador , including an asylum cooperative agreement ( ACA ) with each country .
The agreements permit the U.S. to send asylum seekers of other nationalities to precisely those Central American countries that hundreds of thousands of citizens have been fleeing , and forcing them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ home .
More than 900 Hondurans and Salvadorans were sent to Guatemala under the agreement between November 2019 and mid-March 2020 , when implementation was suspended due to factors related to COVID-19 , and the president of El Salvador said months prior that his country did not yet have any capacity to receive people under the third country deal .
But implementation of the U.S.-Honduras asylum cooperative agreement could potentially begin at any time , following its publication on May 1 in the U.S. Federal Register .
“ There are some reasons why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other ACAs like the Honduran ACA , ” said Yael Schacher , senior U.S. advocate at Refugees International , a humanitarian and advocacy group based in Washington , D.C .
Together with Human Rights Watch , Refugees International just released a new report , “ Deportation with a Layover , ” that examines the U.S.-Guatemala asylum cooperative agreement .
The May 19 report details rights violations and lack of protection at every step of the way , from U.S. Customs and Border Protection ( CBP ) custody to Guatemala .
People are effectively @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to the report , which notes only 20 of the 939 Hondurans and Salvadorans sent to Guatemala under the deal applied for asylum in Guatemala .
“ We wanted to document how bad it was , the human rights violations , in Guatemala , because however bad it was in Guatemala , Honduras is going to be worse , ” Schacher , one of the report ’ s authors , told Truthout .
In Guatemala , a handful of asylum officers contend with a backlog and cumbersome process that requires high-level officials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but Honduras has even less capacity to process asylum claims , said Schacher .
Honduras is also more dangerous , with a higher murder rate , staggering levels of state violence and political repression , and high-level government involvement in drug trafficking .
For the time being , the Central American asylum deals appear to be on the back burner .
The U.S. is using a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ) order authorizing the expulsion at the border of noncitizens without entry documents , including asylum seekers and unaccompanied @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been expelled since the initial CDC order in March covering a 30-day period that was then renewed .
“ The administration is using this CDC order , which is ostensibly about protecting public health during the pandemic , to effectively eliminate asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border , ” said Kennji Kizuka , a senior researcher and policy analyst at Human Rights First , a human rights organization based in four U.S. cities .
“ What that means is that CBP is not processing anyone who ’ s applying for asylum at the ports @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the border between ports of entry is being expelled under the CDC order , either into Mexico or to their home countries , ” Kizuka told Truthout .
The CDC expulsions join a long list of illegal and dangerous policies aimed at curtailing asylum , Human Rights First argues in a May 13 report titled “ Pandemic as Pretext.
” The report also provides an update on the group ’ s ongoing research into the devastating consequences of the Migrant Protection Protocols ( MPP ) – which , since January 2019 , has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seekers to remain in Mexico while awaiting U.S. immigration court hearings .
There have been more than 1,000 reports of attacks – including kidnappings , rape and torture – against asylum seekers in Mexico subject to the MPP , and the CDC order is expelling thousands more people back into border areas where migrants and asylum seekers have been targeted .
The CDC order is currently in effect until May 20 , but the restrictions could soon be extended indefinitely without the need for active renewal every month .
The New York Times @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump administration is planning an indefinite extension by way of a new order that would keep the measures in place until the CDC director deems COVID-19 no longer a threat .
“ Were the CDC to extend this order indefinitely , that seems to point even more solidly to the fact that this is a political decision and not one based in public health , because the administration has clearly been wanting to shut down asylum at the border for a long time and now they ’ ve found this pretext to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That ’ s at a time when people are still able to cross the border between the U.S. and Mexico to go to work or to school , to do essential activities , but CBP isn ’ t taking even basic precautions like requiring CBP officers to wear gloves and masks , ” he said .
The potential indefinite extension also comes at a time when the U.S. has more total confirmed COVID-19 cases ( over 1.5 million ) and deaths ( over 90,000 ) than any other country in the world , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the virus through deportations .
More than 1,000 migrants and asylum seekers in Immigration and Customs Enforcement ( ICE ) custody have tested positive for COVID-19 , but the percentage of detainees who have been tested is still single digit .
Deportees have subsequently tested positive for COVID-19 in Guatemala , Mexico and Haiti .
Many more unreported cases are very likely , due to extremely limited testing in both ICE custody and home countries .
Deportations began dropping in March in comparison to January and February and recent years , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still been expelling and deporting thousands of migrants and asylum seekers to Latin America and the Caribbean .
In April alone , the U.S. deported 1,307 Hondurans and 716 Guatemalans , according to government statistics in the two countries .
Guatemala has briefly suspended incoming U.S. deportation flights after confirming COVID-19 cases among returning migrants and asylum seekers .
More than 100 deportees are among the country ’ s 2,001 total cases .
Flights have resumed following U.S. commitments to step up monitoring and testing , but deportees have periodically continued to test @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when carrying U.S.-issued paperwork claiming they did not have the virus .
“ ICE is just not adequately testing people either in detention or before deportation , ” said Schacher .
“ Guatemala ’ s the only country in Central America that ’ s sort of been pushing back on the Trump administration , ” she told Truthout .
“ Other countries have not demanded what Guatemala has demanded , like the paperwork proving they ’ re negative for COVID.
” Schacher posits that ongoing Guatemalan pushback on deportations with regard to COVID-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could potentially lead to implementation of the asylum cooperative agreement in Honduras amid the pandemic .
The ACAs are more complicated than most U.S. policies and programs restricting asylum for a few reasons , not the least of which is their bilateral nature , and overall , the agreements are “ really a relatively minor piece of this enormous enforcement plan at the border , ” said Schacher .
The U.S. “ has other tools in its toolbox to use .
I think this is sort of a policy that it used when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ The Trump administration turns to it when it ’ s in a lurch , when it ’ s in a bind with other policies , ” Schacher added , explaining that U.S. pushes to move the ACAs forward have coincided with moments when implementation of other measures to restrict asylum have been at least temporarily hindered , particularly by litigation .
“ If Guatemala puts up too much of a fuss and prevents the U.S. from deporting as many Guatemalans to Guatemala as it wants to because of the COVID [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. just sending Guatemalans to Honduras under that ACA , ” she said .
After months of U.S. and Honduran government indications that implementation of the ACA was just around the corner , there is now no clear timeline as to if or when that will happen beyond the recent official publication of the agreement paving its way .
A court challenge against all three ACAs continues in the U.S. , where Human Rights First , the American Civil Liberties Union , National Immigrant Justice Center and the Center for Gender & Refugee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agreements in January .
“ No one should be sent to Honduras , ” said Fernanda .
“ If it were safe , we would not have left .
We had no option.
” * Fernanda ’ s name has been changed to protect her identity .

The U.S. is using the pandemic as a pretext to further shut down asylum, while spreading the virus through deportations.
Part of the Series Despair and Disparity: The Uneven Burdens of COVID-19
Fernanda* doesn’t know what to do. She fled Honduras with her husband and their toddler last year after death threats from gang members she says work with police officers in the family’s neighborhood to extort local businesses and workers. They made it more than 1,500 miles north, hoping to seek asylum in the United States, where Fernanda’s husband has an uncle who could provide them housing and support.
“We just want to be safe and work and contribute,” Fernanda told Truthout.
The family stopped for a while in northern Mexico, where Fernanda’s husband found temporary work. The news they received from asylum seekers ahead of them at the border was worrisome and confusing. People were being attacked. Hondurans were being sent to Guatemala. Sometimes no one could ask for asylum.
“They are always changing the rules,” Fernanda said.
For now, the family’s final leg of the route to the U.S. border is on hold. They are just trying to stay healthy, as the novel coronavirus is rapidly spreading in Mexico, which now has more than 5,000 related deaths, according to government figures. They still hope to be able to seek asylum in the U.S. at some point despite fears they could be deported to Honduras or sent to Guatemala.
COVID-19 Weaponized to Shut Down Borders
The Trump administration began pushing its agenda of shutting down asylum in the U.S. right out of the gate, and COVID-19 has now provided a new justification. Purportedly to protect public health, the government has essentially shut down asylum at the southern border with Mexico while the U.S. spreads the virus through deportations. Asylum deals with Central American nations are currently in limbo, but the administration could begin sending people to a third country, Honduras, at any time.
In 2019, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security signed a series of bilateral agreements with security officials in Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, including an asylum cooperative agreement (ACA) with each country. The agreements permit the U.S. to send asylum seekers of other nationalities to precisely those Central American countries that hundreds of thousands of citizens have been fleeing, and forcing them to seek asylum there instead or return home.
More than 900 Hondurans and Salvadorans were sent to Guatemala under the agreement between November 2019 and mid-March 2020, when implementation was suspended due to factors related to COVID-19, and the president of El Salvador said months prior that his country did not yet have any capacity to receive people under the third country deal. But implementation of the U.S.-Honduras asylum cooperative agreement could potentially begin at any time, following its publication on May 1 in the U.S. Federal Register.
“There are some reasons why the Trump administration might roll out some other ACAs like the Honduran ACA,” said Yael Schacher, senior U.S. advocate at Refugees International, a humanitarian and advocacy group based in Washington, D.C.
Together with Human Rights Watch, Refugees International just released a new report, “Deportation with a Layover,” that examines the U.S.-Guatemala asylum cooperative agreement. The May 19 report details rights violations and lack of protection at every step of the way, from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) custody to Guatemala. People are effectively compelled to abandon their asylum claims, according to the report, which notes only 20 of the 939 Hondurans and Salvadorans sent to Guatemala under the deal applied for asylum in Guatemala.
“We wanted to document how bad it was, the human rights violations, in Guatemala, because however bad it was in Guatemala, Honduras is going to be worse,” Schacher, one of the report’s authors, told Truthout. In Guatemala, a handful of asylum officers contend with a backlog and cumbersome process that requires high-level officials to sign off on each case, but Honduras has even less capacity to process asylum claims, said Schacher. Honduras is also more dangerous, with a higher murder rate, staggering levels of state violence and political repression, and high-level government involvement in drug trafficking.
For the time being, the Central American asylum deals appear to be on the back burner. The U.S. is using a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) order authorizing the expulsion at the border of noncitizens without entry documents, including asylum seekers and unaccompanied minors. More than 20,000 people have been expelled since the initial CDC order in March covering a 30-day period that was then renewed.
“The administration is using this CDC order, which is ostensibly about protecting public health during the pandemic, to effectively eliminate asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border,” said Kennji Kizuka, a senior researcher and policy analyst at Human Rights First, a human rights organization based in four U.S. cities.
“What that means is that CBP is not processing anyone who’s applying for asylum at the ports of entry and anyone who does cross the border between ports of entry is being expelled under the CDC order, either into Mexico or to their home countries,” Kizuka told Truthout.
The CDC expulsions join a long list of illegal and dangerous policies aimed at curtailing asylum, Human Rights First argues in a May 13 report titled “Pandemic as Pretext.” The report also provides an update on the group’s ongoing research into the devastating consequences of the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) – which, since January 2019, has forced thousands of predominantly Central American asylum seekers to remain in Mexico while awaiting U.S. immigration court hearings. There have been more than 1,000 reports of attacks – including kidnappings, rape and torture – against asylum seekers in Mexico subject to the MPP, and the CDC order is expelling thousands more people back into border areas where migrants and asylum seekers have been targeted.
The CDC order is currently in effect until May 20, but the restrictions could soon be extended indefinitely without the need for active renewal every month. The New York Times first reported on May 13 that the Trump administration is planning an indefinite extension by way of a new order that would keep the measures in place until the CDC director deems COVID-19 no longer a threat.
“Were the CDC to extend this order indefinitely, that seems to point even more solidly to the fact that this is a political decision and not one based in public health, because the administration has clearly been wanting to shut down asylum at the border for a long time and now they’ve found this pretext to do it,” said Kizuka.
“That’s at a time when people are still able to cross the border between the U.S. and Mexico to go to work or to school, to do essential activities, but CBP isn’t taking even basic precautions like requiring CBP officers to wear gloves and masks,” he said.
The potential indefinite extension also comes at a time when the U.S. has more total confirmed COVID-19 cases (over 1.5 million) and deaths (over 90,000) than any other country in the world, and has been propagating the global spread of the virus through deportations. More than 1,000 migrants and asylum seekers in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody have tested positive for COVID-19, but the percentage of detainees who have been tested is still single digit.
Deportees have subsequently tested positive for COVID-19 in Guatemala, Mexico and Haiti. Many more unreported cases are very likely, due to extremely limited testing in both ICE custody and home countries. Deportations began dropping in March in comparison to January and February and recent years, but throughout the pandemic, the U.S. has still been expelling and deporting thousands of migrants and asylum seekers to Latin America and the Caribbean. In April alone, the U.S. deported 1,307 Hondurans and 716 Guatemalans, according to government statistics in the two countries.
Guatemala has briefly suspended incoming U.S. deportation flights after confirming COVID-19 cases among returning migrants and asylum seekers. More than 100 deportees are among the country’s 2,001 total cases. Flights have resumed following U.S. commitments to step up monitoring and testing, but deportees have periodically continued to test positive upon arrival in Guatemala, even when carrying U.S.-issued paperwork claiming they did not have the virus.
“ICE is just not adequately testing people either in detention or before deportation,” said Schacher. “Guatemala’s the only country in Central America that’s sort of been pushing back on the Trump administration,” she told Truthout. “Other countries have not demanded what Guatemala has demanded, like the paperwork proving they’re negative for COVID.”
Schacher posits that ongoing Guatemalan pushback on deportations with regard to COVID-19 is one of a few scenarios that could potentially lead to implementation of the asylum cooperative agreement in Honduras amid the pandemic. The ACAs are more complicated than most U.S. policies and programs restricting asylum for a few reasons, not the least of which is their bilateral nature, and overall, the agreements are “really a relatively minor piece of this enormous enforcement plan at the border,” said Schacher.
The U.S. “has other tools in its toolbox to use. I think this is sort of a policy that it used when other policies failed,” she said. “The Trump administration turns to it when it’s in a lurch, when it’s in a bind with other policies,” Schacher added, explaining that U.S. pushes to move the ACAs forward have coincided with moments when implementation of other measures to restrict asylum have been at least temporarily hindered, particularly by litigation.
“If Guatemala puts up too much of a fuss and prevents the U.S. from deporting as many Guatemalans to Guatemala as it wants to because of the COVID [issue], I could see the U.S. just sending Guatemalans to Honduras under that ACA,” she said.
After months of U.S. and Honduran government indications that implementation of the ACA was just around the corner, there is now no clear timeline as to if or when that will happen beyond the recent official publication of the agreement paving its way. A court challenge against all three ACAs continues in the U.S., where Human Rights First, the American Civil Liberties Union, National Immigrant Justice Center and the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies filed a federal lawsuit against the agreements in January.
“No one should be sent to Honduras,” said Fernanda. “If it were safe, we would not have left. We had no option.”
* Fernanda’s name has been changed to protect her identity.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-05-19--As Pandemic Cuts Ravage Newsrooms, Diversity Is “First Thing That Goes”

At a time when many journalists are risking their lives to cover the coronavirus , media companies are slashing jobs and salaries .
Over the past week , hundreds of journalists at Vice , Quartz , The Economist , BuzzFeed and Condé Nast have been laid off .
In April , The New York Times estimated 36,000 employees of news media companies had been laid off , furloughed or had their pay reduced since the arrival of the pandemic .
We speak with award-winning journalist and former editor of The Denver Post , Gregory Moore .
He says , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because of the economic shutdown , and it has led to devastating layoffs and furloughs … at a time when the public really needs quality information more than ever.
” We also speak with freelance journalist Angely Mercado , who was laid off in March .
This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : This is Democracy Now !
, democracynow.org , The War and Peace Report .
I ’ m Amy Goodman , with Juan González , as we end today ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ journalism in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic .
At a time when many journalists are risking their lives to cover one of the most significant stories of their lifetime , media companies are slashing jobs and salaries .
Over the past week , hundreds of journalists at Vice , Quartz , The Economist , BuzzFeed , Condé Nast have been laid off .
In April , The New York Times estimated 36,000 employees of news media companies had been laid off , furloughed or had their pay reduced since the arrival of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was a month ago .
The crisis is not new .
The size of America ’ s newsrooms have been shrinking for years .
According to the Columbia Journalism Review , nearly 3,400 journalists lost their jobs in 2019 .
Another estimate put the toll at nearly 8,000 .
The Pew Research Center recently reported U.S. newspapers have shed about half of their newsroom staffs since 2008 .
We ’ re joined by two guests .
Gregory Moore is the former editor of The Denver Post , which won four Pulitzer Prizes under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chair of the Pulitzer Prize board , former board member of the National Association of Black Journalists .
His recent article at Pulitzer.org is headlined “ How Will the COVID-19 Crisis Affect Local News Businesses ?
” And we ’ re joined by Angely Mercado .
She ’ s a freelance writer , researcher , based in New York , has written for The New York Times , Vice , The Nation , among many more .
In her new piece for CNBC , she writes , “ I got laid off on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ move back home .
My new side hustle is writing obituaries for $ 200.
” Well , Gregory Moore and Angely Mercado , welcome to Democracy Now !
Greg , let ’ s begin with you .
Lay out the scope of the problem .
We ’ re talking about tens of thousands of media workers all over this country .
And at a time when those in power have to be held most accountable , newsrooms are shrinking and being shuttered .
GREGORY MOORE : Yeah .
Thank you , Amy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ on for a decade .
And it just so happens that this trend , you know , sort of runs smack dab into the biggest news story of a generation , certainly since 9/11 .
And so , you have this incredible thirst and hunger , from a confused and dismayed public , for accurate , quality information at precisely the same moment where advertising has fallen out of these newspapers because of the economic shutdown , and it has led to devastating layoffs and furloughs , you know , two-week furloughs , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at a time when the public really needs quality information more than ever .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : And , Greg , first of all , greetings .
It ’ s been several years since we ’ ve had a chance to talk .
GREGORY MOORE : Good to see you , Juan .
Yeah .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : But I wanted to ask you , in particular , about this whole issue of the for-profit model in journalism , and especially some of the vulture funds , which you are familiar with , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over The Denver Post and many other newspapers around the country , and it ’ s been called by Vanity Fair the “ grim reaper ” of American journalism , and by Margaret Sullivan , The Washington Post media critic — she called it “ one of the most ruthless of the corporate strip-miners seemingly intent on destroying local journalism.
” What ’ s been the impact of companies like Alden Global Capital in this particular crisis now , the coronavirus crisis especially ?
GREGORY MOORE : You know , it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think the role has been one of consistency .
Nothing ’ s changed .
A lot of those organizations don ’ t really understand journalism .
They don ’ t really care that much about journalism .
They don ’ t really interfere in the coverage of news .
All they care about is the financial side of the house .
And as long as a profit margin could be maintained , it ’ s up to the editors to figure out what they can and can not cover .
But the impact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ erosion of resources in newsrooms , have really left them crippled when it comes to being able to do the essential accountability reporting and to fulfill that public trust role that is really the heart and soul of journalism as it ’ s been practiced in America , you know , for — since the founding .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : And what ’ s your sense of potential solutions for once we get past this pandemic ?
There are some groups , like Free Press and other media advocacy groups , that are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of funds into the news business .
How that would work , if it could even get through Congress ?
How it would — if it could survive a presidential veto , how it would work ?
Do you think that we must stick with the advertiser-driven model , or is there a place for nonprofit , socially responsible models for producing news in America ?
GREGORY MOORE : I think the latter is the future .
You know , the for-profit model , I mean , newspapers and journalism has always really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ engaged in collecting advertising to put in newspapers , right ?
But the question is whether the advertising model that has been in place has just collapsed .
And it has .
And mainly it ’ s collapsed because of the dominance of Facebook and Google .
So I think a few things need to happen .
First , we need to , you know , stop holding onto the ideas of the past .
There was nothing really magical about the advertising model .
Advertisers happen to also be powerful institutions in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we had to fight with them all the time .
So there ’ s nothing sacrosanct about that .
I think we ought to look at a taxpayer-funded model .
I think we should look at a model that ’ s similar to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting .
I think we have to look at philanthropy .
I think we have to look at social impact funds that might be willing to fund journalism .
I think we need to look at everything .
And — AMY GOODMAN : Well , let @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Aaron and Free Press ’ s proposal .
He wrote recently in the Columbia Journalism Review — he ’ s CEO of Free Press and Free Press Action — that journalism needs a stimulus of at least $ 5 billion in emergency funds and that Congress should put a foundation in place to help sustain journalism over the long term .
Craig Aaron wrote , “ A journalism-recovery package should include : Doubling federal funds for public media .
… Direct support for daily and weekly newsrooms .
… New investments in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He mentioned efforts like yours , the Colorado Media Project , where you , Greg , have served on the local advisory committee .
AMY GOODMAN : Can you talk about this project ?
And when he talks about the sort of model for public television and radio that we already know , he says it has to go beyond NPR and PBS to nonprofit newsrooms all over the country .
GREGORY MOORE : You know what ?
I think there ’ s a bunch of really good ideas in there .
You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that I would endorse that entire package of ideas .
I think I would start with Facebook and Google , which I think have contributed more to the collapse of the advertising model for newspapers than almost any other entity .
And if Facebook and Google would step up to their own responsibility here , you know , and put some substantial funding into supporting local newspapers , the local newspaper ecosystem across the country , I think that would be a better place to start .
And they ’ ve already come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ [ million ] or $ 400 million , respectively .
I think that ’ s a fraction of what they need to put on the table .
But yes , I think we should look at taxpayer-supported models .
I think , like I said , the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is a very good model .
But whatever we decide to do in terms of looking to the future , we ’ re going to have to put guardrails and safeguards to protect the independence of the press .
And that was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when we had the advertising model .
So , all ideas are welcome .
I think we have to think out of the box .
And I think that that proposal represents that kind of thinking .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : I ’ d like to bring in Angely Mercado from New York as one of the victims of this mass of layoffs recently in the news industry .
Talk about your personal experience and what it has meant to you in terms of being able to function as a journalist .
ANGELY MERCADO @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for having me , Juan and Amy .
And yeah , I ’ m one of the many people that was laid off this March .
And these layoffs don ’ t just affect staffers ; they affect freelancers , because I ’ m now essentially a freelancer again .
And when the budget goes down , like not enough to have staffers , that also means that less publications can take on freelancers , there ’ s less budget to take on extra projects , and freelancers also losing a lot of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ noticed .
And I think it ’ s been a very daunting time to be back at freelancing , because there aren ’ t as many job openings , there aren ’ t as many opportunities .
At one point — I think it was late March — I had sent out a pitch to an editor that I connected with on Facebook , and then , after I had done all the work and the pre-research , was told that their budget had just been cut , so they could no longer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are a lot of people who are being affected in different ways .
There are also freelancers that rely on service jobs sometimes , part times , in order to subsidize their income whenever their freelancing budget runs dry .
And that ’ s no longer available .
So , different avenues that a lot of journalists and freelancers use to subsidize income , to be a little bit more stable while they wait for an invoice to come through , it ’ s not available anymore .
And it ’ s just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for work and trying to work on projects .
And there are also freelancers who maybe don ’ t have health insurance in the middle of a global health crisis .
So , there are a lot of factors , a lot of moving factors , that none of us could have ever really guess would happen or that we could have really prepared for , that are occurring right now because of the pandemic .
AMY GOODMAN : Angely , you were laid off on Friday the 13th .
You went on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ talk about writing obituaries for $ 200 at the same time that your own cousin died of COVID-19 ?
ANGELY MERCADO : Yeah , there ’ s a cousin on my mother ’ s side that I called Tía , since she ’ s older , and she unfortunately passed away due to COVID-19 .
And it ’ s very difficult to talk to people who you have also lost their loved ones , for another project , and then to know that I can ’ t go travel and support that relative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t really take time off to think about what was going on , because I was working on different things .
I didn ’ t feel like I could take that time off for myself .
And I know that there are a lot of freelancers who are experiencing the same thing .
They ’ re losing friends , community members .
They themselves might be sick .
And there isn ’ t much safety net for freelancers in the United States .
We don ’ t have time to really mourn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feel like we can reject work whenever we ’ re feeling emotionally taxed right now .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : Yeah , I ’ d like to go back to Greg Moore for a second to ask you , Greg : What do you sense , as a veteran journalist and editor , has been the impact on the American public of President Trump ’ s continued attacks on the mass media as enemies of the people ?
GREGORY MOORE : Yeah .
You know , I do think that it ’ s eroded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also think it ’ s incited a lot of contempt .
Just recently , you know , some of the reporters who were covering the “ open the economy ” protests , they were yelled at and screamed at and threatened .
You know , I ’ m just hoping it doesn ’ t escalate into the kind of violence that we saw in Maryland with the Capital Gazette .
But I think it has incited a kind of contempt and anger towards the media .
But I also don ’ t think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their job and keeping their eye on the ball , but they do it under much more threatening conditions .
AMY GOODMAN : And the issue of diversity when you lose local newsrooms all over the country , Greg ?
GREGORY MOORE : Yeah , that ’ s the first thing that goes , is diversity .
A lot of times , those people tend to be the last ones hired and the first ones to be laid off .
And so , one of the things you begin to see is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ particular , I ’ m really concerned about some of the new digital startups .
I mean , when you go and look at many of these digital startups , very few people of color are a part of that system .
And I think that ’ s the number one thing as we look to the future of media in this country , whatever that is going to become , is to get a recommitment that it should be for everyone .
And we need people of color at all levels to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stories that need to be told the right way .
Right now that ’ s suffering .
AMY GOODMAN : Well , Greg Moore , we want to thank you so much for being with us , award-winning journalist , past Pulitzer Prize board chair , former editor of The Denver Post , which won four Pulitzers under his tenure , and Angely Mercado , freelance writer , researcher , here in New York , recently laid off .
And that does it for our show .
I want to wish a very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Miles Escuder Hattis , there shown with , as his dad , Scott , said , the kind of friends you don ’ t have to stay away from .
Well , we hope to make this world safer for you , Miles , and for everyone .
And a very love-filled congratulations to Anna Escuder and Scott Hattis on the birthday of Miles .
Democracy Now !
is working with as few people on site as possible .
The majority of our amazing team is working from home .
Democracy Now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mike Burke , Deena Guzder , Libby Rainey , Nermeen Shaikh , Carla Wills , Tami Woronoff , Charina Nadura , Sam Alcoff , Tey-Marie Astudillo , John Hamilton , Robby Karran , Hany Massoud , Adriano Contreras , María Taracena .
Our general manager is Julie Crosby .
Special thanks to Becca Staley , Miriam Barnard , Denis Moynihan .
I ’ m Amy Goodman , with Juan González .
Stay safe .

At a time when many journalists are risking their lives to cover the coronavirus, media companies are slashing jobs and salaries. Over the past week, hundreds of journalists at Vice, Quartz, The Economist, BuzzFeed and Condé Nast have been laid off. In April, The New York Times estimated 36,000 employees of news media companies had been laid off, furloughed or had their pay reduced since the arrival of the pandemic. We speak with award-winning journalist and former editor of The Denver Post, Gregory Moore. He says, “Advertising has fallen out of these newspapers because of the economic shutdown, and it has led to devastating layoffs and furloughs … at a time when the public really needs quality information more than ever.” We also speak with freelance journalist Angely Mercado, who was laid off in March.
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González, as we end today’s show looking at the future of journalism in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic.
At a time when many journalists are risking their lives to cover one of the most significant stories of their lifetime, media companies are slashing jobs and salaries. Over the past week, hundreds of journalists at Vice, Quartz, The Economist, BuzzFeed, Condé Nast have been laid off. In April, The New York Times estimated 36,000 employees of news media companies had been laid off, furloughed or had their pay reduced since the arrival of the pandemic — 36,000, and that was a month ago.
The crisis is not new. The size of America’s newsrooms have been shrinking for years. According to the Columbia Journalism Review, nearly 3,400 journalists lost their jobs in 2019. Another estimate put the toll at nearly 8,000. The Pew Research Center recently reported U.S. newspapers have shed about half of their newsroom staffs since 2008.
We’re joined by two guests. Gregory Moore is the former editor of The Denver Post, which won four Pulitzer Prizes under his tenure. He’s past chair of the Pulitzer Prize board, former board member of the National Association of Black Journalists. His recent article at Pulitzer.org is headlined “How Will the COVID-19 Crisis Affect Local News Businesses?”
And we’re joined by Angely Mercado. She’s a freelance writer, researcher, based in New York, has written for The New York Times, Vice, The Nation, among many more. In her new piece for CNBC, she writes, “I got laid off on Friday the 13th — and had to move back home. My new side hustle is writing obituaries for $200.”
Well, Gregory Moore and Angely Mercado, welcome to Democracy Now! Greg, let’s begin with you. Lay out the scope of the problem. We’re talking about tens of thousands of media workers all over this country. And at a time when those in power have to be held most accountable, newsrooms are shrinking and being shuttered.
GREGORY MOORE: Yeah. Thank you, Amy. You know, this has been going on for a decade. And it just so happens that this trend, you know, sort of runs smack dab into the biggest news story of a generation, certainly since 9/11. And so, you have this incredible thirst and hunger, from a confused and dismayed public, for accurate, quality information at precisely the same moment where advertising has fallen out of these newspapers because of the economic shutdown, and it has led to devastating layoffs and furloughs, you know, two-week furloughs, two-month furloughs, in some cases, at a time when the public really needs quality information more than ever.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Greg, first of all, greetings. It’s been several years since we’ve had a chance to talk.
GREGORY MOORE: Good to see you, Juan. Yeah.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: But I wanted to ask you, in particular, about this whole issue of the for-profit model in journalism, and especially some of the vulture funds, which you are familiar with, like Alden Global Capital, which took over The Denver Post and many other newspapers around the country, and it’s been called by Vanity Fair the “grim reaper” of American journalism, and by Margaret Sullivan, The Washington Post media critic — she called it “one of the most ruthless of the corporate strip-miners seemingly intent on destroying local journalism.” What’s been the impact of companies like Alden Global Capital in this particular crisis now, the coronavirus crisis especially?
GREGORY MOORE: You know, it’s a good question, Juan. I think the role has been one of consistency. Nothing’s changed. A lot of those organizations don’t really understand journalism. They don’t really care that much about journalism. They don’t really interfere in the coverage of news. All they care about is the financial side of the house. And as long as a profit margin could be maintained, it’s up to the editors to figure out what they can and cannot cover.
But the impact of that, that is a relentless erosion of resources in newsrooms, have really left them crippled when it comes to being able to do the essential accountability reporting and to fulfill that public trust role that is really the heart and soul of journalism as it’s been practiced in America, you know, for — since the founding.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And what’s your sense of potential solutions for once we get past this pandemic? There are some groups, like Free Press and other media advocacy groups, that are calling for some sort of government infusion of funds into the news business. How that would work, if it could even get through Congress? How it would — if it could survive a presidential veto, how it would work? Do you think that we must stick with the advertiser-driven model, or is there a place for nonprofit, socially responsible models for producing news in America?
GREGORY MOORE: I think the latter is the future. You know, the for-profit model, I mean, newspapers and journalism has always really been about profit, ever since we engaged in collecting advertising to put in newspapers, right? But the question is whether the advertising model that has been in place has just collapsed. And it has. And mainly it’s collapsed because of the dominance of Facebook and Google.
So I think a few things need to happen. First, we need to, you know, stop holding onto the ideas of the past. There was nothing really magical about the advertising model. Advertisers happen to also be powerful institutions in our community that newspapers cover, that we had to fight with them all the time. So there’s nothing sacrosanct about that. I think we ought to look at a taxpayer-funded model. I think we should look at a model that’s similar to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. I think we have to look at philanthropy. I think we have to look at social impact funds that might be willing to fund journalism. I think we need to look at everything. And —
AMY GOODMAN: Well, let’s go more specifically into Craig Aaron and Free Press’s proposal. He wrote recently in the Columbia Journalism Review — he’s CEO of Free Press and Free Press Action — that journalism needs a stimulus of at least $5 billion in emergency funds and that Congress should put a foundation in place to help sustain journalism over the long term.
Craig Aaron wrote, “A journalism-recovery package should include: Doubling federal funds for public media. … Direct support for daily and weekly newsrooms. … New investments in the news [that communities] need.” He mentioned efforts like yours, the Colorado Media Project, where you, Greg, have served on the local advisory committee.
GREGORY MOORE: Right.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about this project? And when he talks about the sort of model for public television and radio that we already know, he says it has to go beyond NPR and PBS to nonprofit newsrooms all over the country.
GREGORY MOORE: You know what? I think there’s a bunch of really good ideas in there. You know, I don’t know that I would endorse that entire package of ideas. I think I would start with Facebook and Google, which I think have contributed more to the collapse of the advertising model for newspapers than almost any other entity. And if Facebook and Google would step up to their own responsibility here, you know, and put some substantial funding into supporting local newspapers, the local newspaper ecosystem across the country, I think that would be a better place to start. And they’ve already come up to the plate with $300 [million] or $400 million, respectively. I think that’s a fraction of what they need to put on the table.
But yes, I think we should look at taxpayer-supported models. I think, like I said, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is a very good model. But whatever we decide to do in terms of looking to the future, we’re going to have to put guardrails and safeguards to protect the independence of the press. And that was the same thing we had to do when we had the advertising model. So, all ideas are welcome. I think we have to think out of the box. And I think that that proposal represents that kind of thinking.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: I’d like to bring in Angely Mercado from New York as one of the victims of this mass of layoffs recently in the news industry. Talk about your personal experience and what it has meant to you in terms of being able to function as a journalist.
ANGELY MERCADO: Well, thank you so much for having me, Juan and Amy.
And yeah, I’m one of the many people that was laid off this March. And these layoffs don’t just affect staffers; they affect freelancers, because I’m now essentially a freelancer again. And when the budget goes down, like not enough to have staffers, that also means that less publications can take on freelancers, there’s less budget to take on extra projects, and freelancers also losing a lot of work, from what I’ve noticed.
And I think it’s been a very daunting time to be back at freelancing, because there aren’t as many job openings, there aren’t as many opportunities. At one point — I think it was late March — I had sent out a pitch to an editor that I connected with on Facebook, and then, after I had done all the work and the pre-research, was told that their budget had just been cut, so they could no longer work with me.
So, there are a lot of people who are being affected in different ways. There are also freelancers that rely on service jobs sometimes, part times, in order to subsidize their income whenever their freelancing budget runs dry. And that’s no longer available. So, different avenues that a lot of journalists and freelancers use to subsidize income, to be a little bit more stable while they wait for an invoice to come through, it’s not available anymore. And it’s just a very scary time to be looking for work and trying to work on projects. And there are also freelancers who maybe don’t have health insurance in the middle of a global health crisis. So, there are a lot of factors, a lot of moving factors, that none of us could have ever really guess would happen or that we could have really prepared for, that are occurring right now because of the pandemic.
AMY GOODMAN: Angely, you were laid off on Friday the 13th. You went on to do freelance work. You now talk about writing obituaries for $200 at the same time that your own cousin died of COVID-19?
ANGELY MERCADO: Yeah, there’s a cousin on my mother’s side that I called Tía, since she’s older, and she unfortunately passed away due to COVID-19. And it’s very difficult to talk to people who you have also lost their loved ones, for another project, and then to know that I can’t go travel and support that relative’s immediate family. I couldn’t really take time off to think about what was going on, because I was working on different things. I didn’t feel like I could take that time off for myself. And I know that there are a lot of freelancers who are experiencing the same thing. They’re losing friends, community members. They themselves might be sick. And there isn’t much safety net for freelancers in the United States. We don’t have time to really mourn people we’ve lost or to feel like we can reject work whenever we’re feeling emotionally taxed right now.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Yeah, I’d like to go back to Greg Moore for a second to ask you, Greg: What do you sense, as a veteran journalist and editor, has been the impact on the American public of President Trump’s continued attacks on the mass media as enemies of the people?
GREGORY MOORE: Yeah. You know, I do think that it’s eroded some confidence in the media. I also think it’s incited a lot of contempt. Just recently, you know, some of the reporters who were covering the “open the economy” protests, they were yelled at and screamed at and threatened. You know, I’m just hoping it doesn’t escalate into the kind of violence that we saw in Maryland with the Capital Gazette. But I think it has incited a kind of contempt and anger towards the media. But I also don’t think that it has deterred journalists from doing their job and keeping their eye on the ball, but they do it under much more threatening conditions.
AMY GOODMAN: And the issue of diversity when you lose local newsrooms all over the country, Greg?
GREGORY MOORE: Yeah, that’s the first thing that goes, is diversity. A lot of times, those people tend to be the last ones hired and the first ones to be laid off. And so, one of the things you begin to see is the whitening of the media. And in particular, I’m really concerned about some of the new digital startups. I mean, when you go and look at many of these digital startups, very few people of color are a part of that system.
And I think that’s the number one thing as we look to the future of media in this country, whatever that is going to become, is to get a recommitment that it should be for everyone. And we need people of color at all levels to be able to participate, tell the stories that need to be told the right way. Right now that’s suffering.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, Greg Moore, we want to thank you so much for being with us, award-winning journalist, past Pulitzer Prize board chair, former editor of The Denver Post, which won four Pulitzers under his tenure, and Angely Mercado, freelance writer, researcher, here in New York, recently laid off.
And that does it for our show. I want to wish a very happy 11th-week birthday to my new nephew, Miles Escuder Hattis, there shown with, as his dad, Scott, said, the kind of friends you don’t have to stay away from. Well, we hope to make this world safer for you, Miles, and for everyone. And a very love-filled congratulations to Anna Escuder and Scott Hattis on the birthday of Miles.
Happy Birthday to Simin Farkhondeh and Eli Putnam!
Democracy Now! is working with as few people on site as possible. The majority of our amazing team is working from home. Democracy Now! is produced with Renée Feltz, Mike Burke, Deena Guzder, Libby Rainey, Nermeen Shaikh, Carla Wills, Tami Woronoff, Charina Nadura, Sam Alcoff, Tey-Marie Astudillo, John Hamilton, Robby Karran, Hany Massoud, Adriano Contreras, María Taracena. Our general manager is Julie Crosby. Special thanks to Becca Staley, Miriam Barnard, Denis Moynihan. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González. Stay safe.