vox--2020-11-09--Is social media ready for a Covid-19 vaccine?

On Monday , Pfizer and BioNTech announced in a press release that their vaccine candidate was more than 90 percent effective at preventing Covid-19 infection , based on initial results from their ongoing phase 3 clinical trial .
The company expects to have applied for emergency use authorization with the Food and Drug Administration ( FDA ) by the end of November and could have as many as 50 million doses produced by the end of 2020 .
This is tremendous news — and misinformation about it is already circulating on social media .
According to research from VineSight , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those of Donald Trump Jr. and Sen. Ted Cruz , are already questioning the timing of the results ’ release just days after the presidential election .
By midday , tweets pushing that narrative had racked up more than 20,000 shares .
The researchers estimate that Donald Trump Jr. ’ s tweet alone could have been seen by nearly 7 million people .
The dream of bringing a speedy end to the pandemic is a complicated one .
Even when a vaccine does win initial FDA authorization in the United States , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chaos and confusion , ” one expert recently told the New York Times .
Much of that disarray could play out on social media .
From the possibility of multiple vaccines to regionally distinct distribution plans to still-evolving research , the process of vaccine implementation is already stoking anxiety and misinformation .
Since the pandemic began , Facebook , Twitter , and YouTube have faced pressure to combat conspiracy theories about Covid-19 vaccines .
When one or more vaccines are ultimately offered to the public , the companies will also need to continue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health precautions .
And they must act sooner rather than later to grapple with the task of communicating and moderating this next period of the pandemic , according to Jennifer Reich , a sociology professor at the University of Colorado Denver who has studied vaccine hesitance .
“ This is not going to be magic , ” Reich told Recode .
“ I think that the way the vaccine has been messaged has been like , ‘ Just wait till we have a vaccine and then we can all go back to life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not a realistic expectation.
” Public health and social media experts told Recode that social media companies should expect anti-vaccination communities to use social media to capitalize on peoples ’ understandable concerns about a potential Covid-19 vaccine .
At the same time , many will be confused and frustrated at the distribution of the vaccine , and some may be angry when they see others getting a vaccine before they do .
That will come amid conspiracy theories and other misinformation that has already spread about potential Covid-19 vaccines .
Basically , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mess .
In preparation for a vaccine , social media platforms are fine-tuning their rules As news of a viable vaccine draws closer , social media companies are fine-tuning their policies in anticipation of misinformation and changes in public health guidance .
Notably , their approach seems similar to how they ’ ve moderated content around the 2020 presidential election as well as the pandemic in general .
Facebook , Twitter , and YouTube have looked to elevate reliable sources , like local officials and organizations such as the Centers for Disease Control @ @ @ @ @ @ @ World Health Organization ( WHO ) , and they say they will continue turning to official sources of health information if and when a vaccine is announced .
Facebook has changed its approach to clamping down on misinformation , evaluating the need for accurate public health messaging in recent months .
For much of the pandemic , the company had a policy of taking down misinformation that could cause imminent , physical harm , like the false claim that face masks cause Covid-19 , and reducing the prominence of vaccine hoaxes flagged by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ News Feed and search .
But starting this fall , Facebook became more proactive , launching a campaign that urged people to get the flu vaccine and banning advertisements that discourage people from getting vaccinated .
Ads related to legislation about vaccines are still permitted , as are false claims about specific vaccines still undergoing trials .
Facebook has argued that these ads don ’ t meet its potential-for-physical-harm threshold .
“ While public health experts agree that we won ’ t have an approved and widely available Covid-19 vaccine for some time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ challenges and we are actively consulting with health experts on our approach , ” Facebook ’ s vaccine policy lead , Jason Hirsch , told Recode in an email .
“ In the meantime , we continue to work with them to remove verifiably false claims about the virus that could lead to imminent harm.
” Hirsch is the same Facebook executive who told Reuters in August , “ There ’ s a ceiling to how much we can do until the facts on the ground become more concrete.
” At the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more forceful takedowns of vaccine-critical views could actually drive more people toward not taking a vaccine .
Meanwhile , a Twitter spokesperson told Recode that the company recognizes its role in spreading credible public health information and is still crafting how its policies and product might change upon the announcement of a medically authorized vaccine .
Currently , Twitter says it blocks misleading advertising about vaccines and directs people to public health authorities like the Department of Health and Human Services .
YouTube , for its part , is currently building the infrastructure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from public health authorities is elevated .
The company has also banned misinformation about a Covid-19 vaccine .
The company — which currently bans people from saying there is a proven vaccine — recently announced that it would remove videos that include information about vaccines that go against the guidance of local public health officials or organizations like the WHO .
YouTube is also limiting the distribution of videos about vaccines that are “ borderline , ” the same approach it has taken to other on-the-edge content .
But while these three platforms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vaccine , they ’ re still allowing for criticism of such a vaccine and expressions of reluctance toward getting it .
Public health experts told Recode that room for criticism and questioning is vital , and peoples ’ concerns about a vaccine should not be unilaterally removed from platforms .
Still , some potentially worrisome content is already on social media .
On YouTube , there are some videos of people proclaiming why they will not take a Covid-19 vaccine .
On Twitter , Recode found an account purporting to sell a Covid-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Facebook , there are specific groups focused on organizing against taking a Covid-19 vaccine if and when one arrives .
Anti-vaccine content has swirled online for years .
It could get a lot worse .
Many have grown more concerned about taking a Covid-19 vaccine in recent months .
As Pew found in September , just over half of Americans now say they would or probably would get the vaccine .
That figure is down from 72 percent in May .
It ’ s not a mystery why there are varying levels of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are skeptical of the comparatively short time it will have taken to produce a vaccine — it would likely be one of the fastest vaccines produced in human history — and many are worried that the vaccine development process has been politicized .
At the same time , the amount of vaccine misinformation has varied — and at times surged — amid the pandemic , according to research from VineSight .
Some conspiracy theories have focused on false claims that billionaires like Bill Gates were behind a made-up effort to secretly implement microchip-sized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have emerged that Democrats are somehow behind efforts to stall a vaccine .
Adding to confusion and tension will be those who politicize the vaccine ’ s research and distribution .
And when a medically approved Covid-19 vaccine is announced , we should expect that anti-vaxxers , political activists , and conspiracy theory groups like QAnon will go after the pharmaceutical companies involved .
Jonathon Morgan , the CEO of the social intelligence firm Yonder , is working with some of these firms and says some groups will target researchers in order to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get more attention for whatever they ’ re pursuing.
” At the same time , expected delays and pauses in trials — these are normal occurrences that should make the process more trustworthy — could be weaponized to exacerbate the growing feeling among the public that a Covid-19 vaccine is too new and too untested , even if public health officials give it the all-clear .
“ We have a new virus coupled with a new vaccine coupled with a new way of life — it ’ s too much newness to people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sociologist at the University of Sheffield , told Recode .
“ I think the pushback against a Covid-19 vaccine is going to be on a scale we ’ ve never seen before.
” On a brighter note , it ’ s also likely that people will spread a significant amount of positive content about the Covid-19 vaccine , as well .
We should expect family and friends , as well as high-profile people like celebrities and politicians , to post supportive messages about the importance of getting vaccinated .
Platforms still have time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like it or not , social media platforms will be a primary place for many people to learn about a Covid-19 vaccine , and the stakes will be incredibly high .
One major challenge will be that , even when we have an approved vaccine , there could be scenarios that nobody prepared for .
These situations won ’ t be as simple as directing people to correct information when people share false ideas about a Covid-19 vaccine .
“ We can certainly expect that , since it ’ s a novel vaccine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that we didn ’ t anticipate , ” notes David Broniatowski , a George Washington University engineering professor who has studied social media and vaccines .
But there are things that social media companies probably should do now to prepare for such situations .
In addition to lowering expectations for the first vaccine , platforms must also prepare for the kinds of questions people will have about it , and ensure that people have room to openly discuss and question aspects of the vaccine .
Inevitably , one of the most powerful things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a role in making the argument for vaccination itself as a public health imperative .
We still don ’ t have a vaccine approved yet , but news of Pfizer ’ s initial results hints that one could be coming , and more vaccine candidates may be down the line .
That means that as the status of a vaccine shifts , so will social media discussions .
Misinformation won ’ t go away , even with companies banning it .
But , from preparing people for a complicated and lengthy distribution process @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these companies could still make a big difference .
Open Sourced is made possible by Omidyar Network .
All Open Sourced content is editorially independent and produced by our journalists .

On Monday, Pfizer and BioNTech announced in a press release that their vaccine candidate was more than 90 percent effective at preventing Covid-19 infection, based on initial results from their ongoing phase 3 clinical trial. The company expects to have applied for emergency use authorization with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) by the end of November and could have as many as 50 million doses produced by the end of 2020.
This is tremendous news — and misinformation about it is already circulating on social media. According to research from VineSight, a slew of Twitter accounts, including those of Donald Trump Jr. and Sen. Ted Cruz, are already questioning the timing of the results’ release just days after the presidential election. By midday, tweets pushing that narrative had racked up more than 20,000 shares. The researchers estimate that Donald Trump Jr.’s tweet alone could have been seen by nearly 7 million people.
The timing of this is pretty amazing. Nothing nefarious about the timing of this at all right? https://t.co/nS5rkywKXT — Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) November 9, 2020
The dream of bringing a speedy end to the pandemic is a complicated one. Even when a vaccine does win initial FDA authorization in the United States, we should expect a lengthy period of “chaos and confusion,” one expert recently told the New York Times. Much of that disarray could play out on social media.
From the possibility of multiple vaccines to regionally distinct distribution plans to still-evolving research, the process of vaccine implementation is already stoking anxiety and misinformation. Since the pandemic began, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube have faced pressure to combat conspiracy theories about Covid-19 vaccines. When one or more vaccines are ultimately offered to the public, the companies will also need to continue to promote accurate information about ever-evolving public health precautions. And they must act sooner rather than later to grapple with the task of communicating and moderating this next period of the pandemic, according to Jennifer Reich, a sociology professor at the University of Colorado Denver who has studied vaccine hesitance.
“This is not going to be magic,” Reich told Recode. “I think that the way the vaccine has been messaged has been like, ‘Just wait till we have a vaccine and then we can all go back to life as normal.’ That’s probably not a realistic expectation.”
Public health and social media experts told Recode that social media companies should expect anti-vaccination communities to use social media to capitalize on peoples’ understandable concerns about a potential Covid-19 vaccine. At the same time, many will be confused and frustrated at the distribution of the vaccine, and some may be angry when they see others getting a vaccine before they do. That will come amid conspiracy theories and other misinformation that has already spread about potential Covid-19 vaccines.
Basically, it could be a very, very complicated mess.
In preparation for a vaccine, social media platforms are fine-tuning their rules
As news of a viable vaccine draws closer, social media companies are fine-tuning their policies in anticipation of misinformation and changes in public health guidance. Notably, their approach seems similar to how they’ve moderated content around the 2020 presidential election as well as the pandemic in general. Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube have looked to elevate reliable sources, like local officials and organizations such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization (WHO), and they say they will continue turning to official sources of health information if and when a vaccine is announced.
Facebook has changed its approach to clamping down on misinformation, evaluating the need for accurate public health messaging in recent months. For much of the pandemic, the company had a policy of taking down misinformation that could cause imminent, physical harm, like the false claim that face masks cause Covid-19, and reducing the prominence of vaccine hoaxes flagged by global health authorities in places like its News Feed and search. But starting this fall, Facebook became more proactive, launching a campaign that urged people to get the flu vaccine and banning advertisements that discourage people from getting vaccinated. Ads related to legislation about vaccines are still permitted, as are false claims about specific vaccines still undergoing trials. Facebook has argued that these ads don’t meet its potential-for-physical-harm threshold.
“While public health experts agree that we won’t have an approved and widely available Covid-19 vaccine for some time, we understand it will pose new challenges and we are actively consulting with health experts on our approach,” Facebook’s vaccine policy lead, Jason Hirsch, told Recode in an email. “In the meantime, we continue to work with them to remove verifiably false claims about the virus that could lead to imminent harm.”
Hirsch is the same Facebook executive who told Reuters in August, “There’s a ceiling to how much we can do until the facts on the ground become more concrete.” At the same time, the company echoed concern that more forceful takedowns of vaccine-critical views could actually drive more people toward not taking a vaccine.
Meanwhile, a Twitter spokesperson told Recode that the company recognizes its role in spreading credible public health information and is still crafting how its policies and product might change upon the announcement of a medically authorized vaccine. Currently, Twitter says it blocks misleading advertising about vaccines and directs people to public health authorities like the Department of Health and Human Services.
YouTube, for its part, is currently building the infrastructure to ensure that content about Covid-19 vaccines from public health authorities is elevated. The company has also banned misinformation about a Covid-19 vaccine. The company — which currently bans people from saying there is a proven vaccine — recently announced that it would remove videos that include information about vaccines that go against the guidance of local public health officials or organizations like the WHO. YouTube is also limiting the distribution of videos about vaccines that are “borderline,” the same approach it has taken to other on-the-edge content.
But while these three platforms will focus on misinformation about a Covid-19 vaccine, they’re still allowing for criticism of such a vaccine and expressions of reluctance toward getting it. Public health experts told Recode that room for criticism and questioning is vital, and peoples’ concerns about a vaccine should not be unilaterally removed from platforms.
Still, some potentially worrisome content is already on social media. On YouTube, there are some videos of people proclaiming why they will not take a Covid-19 vaccine. On Twitter, Recode found an account purporting to sell a Covid-19 vaccine made in China. And on Facebook, there are specific groups focused on organizing against taking a Covid-19 vaccine if and when one arrives.
Anti-vaccine content has swirled online for years. It could get a lot worse.
Many have grown more concerned about taking a Covid-19 vaccine in recent months. As Pew found in September, just over half of Americans now say they would or probably would get the vaccine. That figure is down from 72 percent in May.
It’s not a mystery why there are varying levels of hesitation about a Covid-19 vaccine. Some are skeptical of the comparatively short time it will have taken to produce a vaccine — it would likely be one of the fastest vaccines produced in human history — and many are worried that the vaccine development process has been politicized.
At the same time, the amount of vaccine misinformation has varied — and at times surged — amid the pandemic, according to research from VineSight. Some conspiracy theories have focused on false claims that billionaires like Bill Gates were behind a made-up effort to secretly implement microchip-sized tracking devices. More recently, theories have emerged that Democrats are somehow behind efforts to stall a vaccine.
Adding to confusion and tension will be those who politicize the vaccine’s research and distribution.
And when a medically approved Covid-19 vaccine is announced, we should expect that anti-vaxxers, political activists, and conspiracy theory groups like QAnon will go after the pharmaceutical companies involved. Jonathon Morgan, the CEO of the social intelligence firm Yonder, is working with some of these firms and says some groups will target researchers in order to use them “as a platform to get more attention for whatever they’re pursuing.”
At the same time, expected delays and pauses in trials — these are normal occurrences that should make the process more trustworthy — could be weaponized to exacerbate the growing feeling among the public that a Covid-19 vaccine is too new and too untested, even if public health officials give it the all-clear.
“We have a new virus coupled with a new vaccine coupled with a new way of life — it’s too much newness to people,” Ysabel Gerrard, a digital sociologist at the University of Sheffield, told Recode. “I think the pushback against a Covid-19 vaccine is going to be on a scale we’ve never seen before.”
On a brighter note, it’s also likely that people will spread a significant amount of positive content about the Covid-19 vaccine, as well. We should expect family and friends, as well as high-profile people like celebrities and politicians, to post supportive messages about the importance of getting vaccinated.
Platforms still have time to prepare for nightmare scenarios
Whether they like it or not, social media platforms will be a primary place for many people to learn about a Covid-19 vaccine, and the stakes will be incredibly high. One major challenge will be that, even when we have an approved vaccine, there could be scenarios that nobody prepared for. These situations won’t be as simple as directing people to correct information when people share false ideas about a Covid-19 vaccine.
“We can certainly expect that, since it’s a novel vaccine, there are going to be things that we didn’t anticipate,” notes David Broniatowski, a George Washington University engineering professor who has studied social media and vaccines.
But there are things that social media companies probably should do now to prepare for such situations. In addition to lowering expectations for the first vaccine, platforms must also prepare for the kinds of questions people will have about it, and ensure that people have room to openly discuss and question aspects of the vaccine. Inevitably, one of the most powerful things social media companies could do is play a role in making the argument for vaccination itself as a public health imperative.
We still don’t have a vaccine approved yet, but news of Pfizer’s initial results hints that one could be coming, and more vaccine candidates may be down the line. That means that as the status of a vaccine shifts, so will social media discussions. Misinformation won’t go away, even with companies banning it. But, from preparing people for a complicated and lengthy distribution process to elevating accurate public health updates, these companies could still make a big difference.
Open Sourced is made possible by Omidyar Network. All Open Sourced content is editorially independent and produced by our journalists.


vox--2020-11-09--Election week memes turned the 2020 presidential race into K-pop-style fandom

Because the 2020 election saw an unprecedented number of mail-in ballots thanks to the Covid-19 pandemic , what would normally have been one tense night of waiting for the results turned into several days of collective waiting on social media .
And you know what that means : memes .
Thanks to the proliferation of TikTok memes and spinoffs dedicated to the election process throughout last week , the term “ fancam , ” a word popularized by K-pop fans to describe audience concert footage , is suddenly everywhere — even if most people are using it the wrong way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up during the long wait for the results of the 2020 presidential election here in the US , as many people got in on making memes fawning over President-elect Joe Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris , among other notable figures .
And people even dedicated many of their memes to the various “ battleground ” states that gained prominence in the vote-counting process .
Memes about the election , especially the vote count , popped up on November 3 , driven largely by TikTok and Twitter users — many of whom used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of anticipation , in particular the way all eyes were glued to a handful of key swing states like Nevada , Georgia , and Pennsylvania .
In fact , if you somehow didn ’ t already know how the vote counting was going , the tone of many of these fan edits and fanvids would immediately tip you off .
( Notice how I didn ’ t call them fancams ?
That ’ s because they ’ re not fancams .
More on fancams in a minute . )
Take , for example @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Going kinda slow there , guys ?
Nevada in particular received the early share of meme attention because of the state ’ s early announcement that its vote-counting process could take up to 10 days .
Cue the onslaught of memes bemoaning Nevada ’ s slowness : Elsewhere , in contentious states like Georgia and Pennsylvania , the call for a count was moving at a more frenzied pace .
Memes followed accordingly : In fact , over the course of the week ’ s extended vote count , just about every state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the memes that went viral across social media celebrated the 4 million vote lead in the popular vote for Joe Biden .
Left-leaning memesters were celebrating a shift in the swing states from red to blue as the votes came in .
In fact , some people got really elaborate with their metaphors : The highlight for me was this delightful meme of US swing states as characters from a Japanese shounen anime series : Alongside the humorous personification of various states , memes also portrayed characters as avatars like mail-in ballots and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ literally portrayed as the Count from Sesame Street : However , an odd and unexpected quirk arose from the conversation around many of these memes as they spread and gained momentum : The general public began calling most of these memes fancams .
It makes sense that as these videos proliferated on mainstream social media , people latched on to the idea that they were fancams .
After all , fancams sound vaguely positive , and these are all positive memes meant to celebrate and commemorate the country ’ s agonizing but memorable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Biden slowly filtered in .
For people who ’ ve seen K-pop and other fan videos across their social media feeds , the idea that we could have fancams of states and the electoral process itself undoubtedly made perfect sense .
It wasn ’ t just people on social media who labeled the videos fancams — CNN did it , too , in an article highlighting the many thirst videos TikTokers were making about political analysts .
But there ’ s just one problem : None of these things are fancams .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ wondering : That ’ s an excellent question , MSNBC political analyst Jacob Soboroff .
It seems not a lot of people know , especially considering that almost none of the replies attempting to explain the meme format to Soboroff actually got their explanations correct — even the ones that attempted to present fancams of Soboroff himself to answer his question : It ’ s not really anyone ’ s fault that the definition of a word as insular as fancam has been misunderstood .
The word has its origins within fan culture @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
As K-pop has become more and more mainstream thanks to bands like BTS and Blackpink , more people have come into contact with its terminology and been confused about what it means .
But this is why you ’ re reading this , right ?
For enlightenment !
So here we go : A fancam is a video that a fan records at a concert that focuses just on their favorite K-pop idol or celebrity .
As I explained in my guide to K-pop fandom , a fancam is a very specific @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] fans to follow their favorite idol the whole time during a performance , even if the main cameras are on a different part of the stage .
That may not sound like a big deal , but fancams are a huge part of K-pop fan culture.
” And they ’ ve spread to become even broader parts of stan culture outside of K-pop .
So , for example , if I want to watch The Untamed ’ s Wang Yibo ’ s recent performance of “ Versace on the Floor , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or I could watch this fancam , which is clearly filmed from the audience and features very different angles than all the official camerawork .
A fancam is so named to differentiate the fan ’ s camerawork from the official camerawork of an event .
And some fancams are so good they become nigh legendary within their fandoms — like this fancam of Wang Yibo performing “ EOEO , ” his band ’ s signature song .
The misuse of the term during election week is what social media experts call “ context @ @ @ @ @ @ @ call “ fannish drift ” : the watering down of an established term and its previously understood meaning as it travels between different parts of the internet , from one social group to another .
But we already have a bunch of more well-established , generalized , and easy-to-remember terms for , like , every other kind of video on the internet .
Geez , guys !
So what am I supposed to call all these other videos ?
Tl ; dr : You can call these election-week meme videos “ edits , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remixes.
” But if you want to drill down into the whys and hows , read on .
First , take “ mashup ” — that ’ s when you take two or more different sources and combine them into a new thing .
For one of the most sublime examples of this , there ’ s “ Mouth Sounds ” from Neil Cicierega — that ’ s the guy who ’ s spent much of the last two decades intermittently dropping incredible albums of pure remixes gleaned from combining internet culture and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ remix ” — that ’ s when you take an existing video or song and add new elements to it .
So those memes you ’ re seeing of Trump ’ s notably hyped spiritual adviser , Paula White ?
Memes like this one set to Eminem ?
You can call each of those remixes : they take an existing video and set it to different music .
Then there are memes that take the remixes and turn those into mashups with other video cuts and footage — like this one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
There ’ s no specific label for this kind of meme , but you ’ ll see it referred to as everything from a remix to an edit .
Finally , we have the “ fanvid.
” Fanvids of the late aughts and early 2010s , with their highly sophisticated editing , heavily influenced the direction that mainstream movie trailers have taken over the last decade .
Check out the incredible syncing on this famous Marvel fanvid : Fanvids also originate from pre-internet fandom and are still everywhere today .
When fanvids @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ID ’ d as “ fan films ” or “ fan trailers.
” The term fanvid never really filtered into mainstream internet culture and mainly just gets used by older fans .
Enter newer fans on Twitter , namely stan Twitter .
These fans , having none of this history and taking the simplest and most straightforward route , tend to simply call everything edits .
You ’ ll notice that nearly all of these terms are interchangeable .
But fancams ?
Fancams arguably aren ’ t interchangeable with these other terms .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ fan creation , so a fancam isn ’ t the same thing as any old fan video on the internet , the way many other terms for “ video of a thing ” might be .
So go ahead and call this video compilation of viral political analyst Steve Kornacki a mashup or a remix or a fanvid or a fan trailer — or you can do what the kids do and just call it an edit .
Don ’ t be swayed by the insistence that things are fancams when they aren @ @ @ @ @ @ @ video compilations of Joe Biden ?
These are fanvids or edits , not fancams , despite what they say on the tin : Same with this Kamala Harris montage — extremely fun , but still not a fancam .
Of course , this doesn ’ t mean that there aren ’ t some memes that defy easy labels .
For instance : This video of Michelle Kwan filming herself in order to make her own version of the election vote memes may almost be a fancam — but is it still a fancam @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
The jury is still out on that one .
So : Are there any actual fancams making the rounds as election season comes to a close ?
Hmm .
To fit the criteria , you ’ d need a video of someone performing on a stage , being filmed by a member of the audience , preferably while singing and dancing .
You know what ?
We ’ ll take it .

Because the 2020 election saw an unprecedented number of mail-in ballots thanks to the Covid-19 pandemic, what would normally have been one tense night of waiting for the results turned into several days of collective waiting on social media.
And you know what that means: memes.
Thanks to the proliferation of TikTok memes and spinoffs dedicated to the election process throughout last week, the term “fancam,” a word popularized by K-pop fans to describe audience concert footage, is suddenly everywhere — even if most people are using it the wrong way.
The idea of the fancam popped up during the long wait for the results of the 2020 presidential election here in the US, as many people got in on making memes fawning over President-elect Joe Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris, among other notable figures. And people even dedicated many of their memes to the various “battleground” states that gained prominence in the vote-counting process.
Memes about the election, especially the vote count, popped up on November 3, driven largely by TikTok and Twitter users — many of whom used existing videos to illustrate the general mood of anticipation, in particular the way all eyes were glued to a handful of key swing states like Nevada, Georgia, and Pennsylvania.
In fact, if you somehow didn’t already know how the vote counting was going, the tone of many of these fan edits and fanvids would immediately tip you off. (Notice how I didn’t call them fancams? That’s because they’re not fancams. More on fancams in a minute.)
Take, for example, this meme clowning on Nevada:
Nevada counting ballots pic.twitter.com/GC85ZFZdMd — Liz Jenkins (@ej11lizzie) November 5, 2020
Going kinda slow there, guys? Nevada in particular received the early share of meme attention because of the state’s early announcement that its vote-counting process could take up to 10 days. Cue the onslaught of memes bemoaning Nevada’s slowness:
This is how Nevada counts ballots pic.twitter.com/JQFy83B2WV — Max Burns (@themaxburns) November 5, 2020
Nevada poll workers opening each ballot pic.twitter.com/CRZ96gfynK — Bird (@BirdExecutive) November 5, 2020
This is why Nevada is taking so long to count their votes ♂ pic.twitter.com/MaPco3WZy8 — Edgarr ✌ (@Edgarr_H) November 5, 2020
nevada after a long night of counting (1) ballot pic.twitter.com/ob81mKgsvY — Daniel Preda (@MisterPreda) November 5, 2020
The only person I trust to count the remaining ballots. #Election2020 pic.twitter.com/oMhEH7KEmp — Viola Davis (@violadavis) November 4, 2020
Elsewhere, in contentious states like Georgia and Pennsylvania, the call for a count was moving at a more frenzied pace. Memes followed accordingly:
Everyone else looking at Pennsylvania like... pic.twitter.com/7cK5aEIdo0 — Trevor Noah (@Trevornoah) November 4, 2020
In fact, over the course of the week’s extended vote count, just about every state got a fannish shout-out.
Many of the memes that went viral across social media celebrated the 4 million vote lead in the popular vote for Joe Biden. Left-leaning memesters were celebrating a shift in the swing states from red to blue as the votes came in.
I aint never seen two pretty best frie- pic.twitter.com/kdqLmUZkph — eleanor (@snitchery) November 6, 2020
In fact, some people got really elaborate with their metaphors:
I’m goin outta my mind pic.twitter.com/U9MLMHHXx5 — Taylor Simonds (@tay_simonds) November 5, 2020
The highlight for me was this delightful meme of US swing states as characters from a Japanese shounen anime series:
This is genuinely the funniest piece of media I’ve ever seen in my life and should absolutely be what is shown to explain the 2020 election for generations to come pic.twitter.com/h7lzol7yDA — Loey ✨ (@Loeybug) November 7, 2020
Alongside the humorous personification of various states, memes also portrayed characters as avatars like mail-in ballots and “the count” — which was literally portrayed as the Count from Sesame Street:
However, an odd and unexpected quirk arose from the conversation around many of these memes as they spread and gained momentum: The general public began calling most of these memes fancams.
GEORGIA JUST WENT BLUE FOR BIDEN HAVE A BLORGIA FANCAM pic.twitter.com/M0yp4yu0zC — BLORGIA FAN ACCOUNT (@bleorgia) November 6, 2020
It makes sense that as these videos proliferated on mainstream social media, people latched on to the idea that they were fancams. After all, fancams sound vaguely positive, and these are all positive memes meant to celebrate and commemorate the country’s agonizing but memorable shift from red to blue as votes for Biden slowly filtered in. For people who’ve seen K-pop and other fan videos across their social media feeds, the idea that we could have fancams of states and the electoral process itself undoubtedly made perfect sense.
It wasn’t just people on social media who labeled the videos fancams — CNN did it, too, in an article highlighting the many thirst videos TikTokers were making about political analysts.
But there’s just one problem: None of these things are fancams.
So, now you’re probably wondering:
What’s a fancam?
What’s a fancam? — Jacob Soboroff (@jacobsoboroff) November 6, 2020
That’s an excellent question, MSNBC political analyst Jacob Soboroff. It seems not a lot of people know, especially considering that almost none of the replies attempting to explain the meme format to Soboroff actually got their explanations correct — even the ones that attempted to present fancams of Soboroff himself to answer his question:
It’s not really anyone’s fault that the definition of a word as insular as fancam has been misunderstood. The word has its origins within fan culture — specifically K-pop “stan” culture. As K-pop has become more and more mainstream thanks to bands like BTS and Blackpink, more people have come into contact with its terminology and been confused about what it means.
But this is why you’re reading this, right? For enlightenment!
So here we go: A fancam is a video that a fan records at a concert that focuses just on their favorite K-pop idol or celebrity.
As I explained in my guide to K-pop fandom, a fancam is a very specific thing: It “allow[s] fans to follow their favorite idol the whole time during a performance, even if the main cameras are on a different part of the stage. That may not sound like a big deal, but fancams are a huge part of K-pop fan culture.” And they’ve spread to become even broader parts of stan culture outside of K-pop.
So, for example, if I want to watch The Untamed’s Wang Yibo’s recent performance of “Versace on the Floor,” I could watch the official performance — or I could watch this fancam, which is clearly filmed from the audience and features very different angles than all the official camerawork.
A fancam is so named to differentiate the fan’s camerawork from the official camerawork of an event. And some fancams are so good they become nigh legendary within their fandoms — like this fancam of Wang Yibo performing “EOEO,” his band’s signature song.
The misuse of the term during election week is what social media experts call “context collapse” and what we in fandom call “fannish drift”: the watering down of an established term and its previously understood meaning as it travels between different parts of the internet, from one social group to another.
But we already have a bunch of more well-established, generalized, and easy-to-remember terms for, like, every other kind of video on the internet. Geez, guys!
So what am I supposed to call all these other videos?
Tl;dr: You can call these election-week meme videos “edits,” “mashups,” or “remixes.”
But if you want to drill down into the whys and hows, read on.
First, take “mashup” — that’s when you take two or more different sources and combine them into a new thing. For one of the most sublime examples of this, there’s “Mouth Sounds” from Neil Cicierega — that’s the guy who’s spent much of the last two decades intermittently dropping incredible albums of pure remixes gleaned from combining internet culture and pop culture.
Then there’s “remix” — that’s when you take an existing video or song and add new elements to it. So those memes you’re seeing of Trump’s notably hyped spiritual adviser, Paula White? Memes like this one set to Eminem?
Every now and then, Twitter delivers complete gold. Trump’s spiritual advisor set to Eminem. With a dancing cat. pic.twitter.com/g3f8j6zGAP — Richard Boorman (@RichardBoorman) November 5, 2020
You can call each of those remixes: they take an existing video and set it to different music.
Then there are memes that take the remixes and turn those into mashups with other video cuts and footage — like this one of Paula White, courtesy of Ava DuVernay.
There’s no specific label for this kind of meme, but you’ll see it referred to as everything from a remix to an edit.
Finally, we have the “fanvid.” Fanvids of the late aughts and early 2010s, with their highly sophisticated editing, heavily influenced the direction that mainstream movie trailers have taken over the last decade. Check out the incredible syncing on this famous Marvel fanvid:
(Then go watch my three favorite fanvids for fun and profit.)
Fanvids also originate from pre-internet fandom and are still everywhere today. When fanvids hit YouTube, they more frequently became ID’d as “fan films” or “fan trailers.” The term fanvid never really filtered into mainstream internet culture and mainly just gets used by older fans.
Enter newer fans on Twitter, namely stan Twitter. These fans, having none of this history and taking the simplest and most straightforward route, tend to simply call everything edits.
You’ll notice that nearly all of these terms are interchangeable. But fancams? Fancams arguably aren’t interchangeable with these other terms. They’re a specific genre of fan creation, so a fancam isn’t the same thing as any old fan video on the internet, the way many other terms for “video of a thing” might be.
So go ahead and call this video compilation of viral political analyst Steve Kornacki a mashup or a remix or a fanvid or a fan trailer — or you can do what the kids do and just call it an edit.
this election has broken me pic.twitter.com/NFwqSyb6gy — gia (hating myself era) (@donnafromww) November 5, 2020
Don’t be swayed by the insistence that things are fancams when they aren’t. For instance, these video compilations of Joe Biden? These are fanvids or edits, not fancams, despite what they say on the tin:
HELP NOT THE BIDEN FANCAM ON MY TL pic.twitter.com/QoyId2XXVf — ًcat (@heoncafe) November 4, 2020
This fancam of Joe Biden x “Ice Cream” is going viral right now. And we love to see it. pic.twitter.com/JuZtAfujGh — Selena Gomez News (@musicfacts_sel) November 4, 2020
Same with this Kamala Harris montage — extremely fun, but still not a fancam.
fuck it! kamala harris fancam to celebrate #PresidentElectJoe pic.twitter.com/Io2lI1sUQr — black lives matter (@landonorr1s) November 7, 2020
Of course, this doesn’t mean that there aren’t some memes that defy easy labels. For instance: This video of Michelle Kwan filming herself in order to make her own version of the election vote memes may almost be a fancam — but is it still a fancam when you turned the camera on yourself? The jury is still out on that one.
I can’t take my eyes off of you PA, AZ, NV & GA. Count every vote #Biden2020 pic.twitter.com/Q8SAUCvHti — Michelle Kwan (@MichelleWKwan) November 5, 2020
So: Are there any actual fancams making the rounds as election season comes to a close?
Hmm. To fit the criteria, you’d need a video of someone performing on a stage, being filmed by a member of the audience, preferably while singing and dancing.
I knew we’d be happy but I didn’t realize we’d be spontaneous dance parties in the street happy. What a moment pic.twitter.com/8NsGheybEU — Sarah Cooper (@sarahcpr) November 8, 2020
You know what? We’ll take it.


vox--2020-11-09--Why Biden’s national mask mandate will be a national mask suggestion

When President-elect Joe Biden accepted the Democratic nomination on August 20 , he said part of his Covid-19 plan would be a “ national mandate to wear a mask.
” Five months later , on January 20 , he ’ ll have his chance to try to implement one .
“ It ’ s time to end the politicization of basic , responsible public health steps like mask-wearing and social distancing , ” Biden said on Monday .
“ The single most effective thing we can do to stop the spread of Covid : Wear a mask.
” He followed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ use of masks : But it won ’ t be easy to implement a mask mandate for the whole country , especially when 16 states still don ’ t have statewide mandates .
( The AARP listed 33 states with mask mandates by the end of October .
Utah , which issued its mandate on Monday , makes 34 .
Washington , DC , and Puerto Rico also have mandates . )
With limited federal powers at his disposal , Biden will have to convince everyone from state and local governments down to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the best and easiest ways to stop the spread of the coronavirus .
Where the president can — and can ’ t — order Americans to mask up There are varying schools of thought about whether the president has the authority to issue a national mask mandate , as many other countries have .
Some attempts to do so at the state and local level have been met with lawsuits and refusals to comply , as masks have become an increasingly politicized and contentious issue .
Biden has said he will issue an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on federal property .
Beyond that , Biden ’ s version of a national mask mandate , as spelled out in his new transition website , does not appear to come from him .
Instead , he ’ s going to be “ working with governors and mayors ” to encourage them to issue their own mandates , as well as remind Americans to wear masks .
While the majority of America ’ s governors have issued statewide mandates , 16 states have not — including Mississippi , which revoked its mask mandate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is requiring masks in certain counties ) .
Though it ’ s hard to see a reality where states and localities run by Republicans work hand in hand with a Democratic president these days — even in the face of a virus that infects people regardless of their political leanings — many firmly Republican state governments have issued mask mandates once their constituents began getting sick and dying , most recently Utah on Monday .
Others still seem to take pride in their obstinance , like South Dakota Gov .
Kristi Noem .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ local governments are trying to issue their own orders .
The majority of Americans approve of masks and mandates While the outgoing administration made a show of not wearing masks even in indoor spaces with large numbers of people where social distancing was impossible , Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris were visible sticklers for masks and social distancing throughout the campaign .
As president-elect , Biden has already announced a board of advisers full of experts in science and public health .
Despite the divided country he will inherit , setting a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ measures may encourage Americans to follow his lead .
Helping him out here is the fact that wearing masks and mask mandates have majority support , even among Americans who lean Republican — and this support predates the most recent , and worst , wave of coronavirus cases the nation is now battling .
There is also data showing that areas with high mask usage see fewer cases of Covid-19 and a decrease in new infections as the use of masks goes up .
One recent study estimated that universal mask use in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Small acts add up to enormous achievements , ” Biden said on Monday .
“ So let ’ s wear a mask .
Let ’ s get to work .
”

Editor’s note, January 20, 2021: President Joe Biden’s first official act on his first day in office was signing an executive order mandating that masks be worn on all federal properties and by federal employees and contractors.
“The first order I’m going to be signing here relates to Covid,” Biden said. “It’s requiring, as I said all along, where I have authority, mandating that masks be worn, social distancing be kept on federal property.”
The original story below was published on November 9, 2020.
When President-elect Joe Biden accepted the Democratic nomination on August 20, he said part of his Covid-19 plan would be a “national mandate to wear a mask.” Five months later, on January 20, he’ll have his chance to try to implement one.
“It’s time to end the politicization of basic, responsible public health steps like mask-wearing and social distancing,” Biden said on Monday. “The single most effective thing we can do to stop the spread of Covid: Wear a mask.”
He followed that up with a tweet encouraging the use of masks:
I won't be president until January 20th, but my message today to everyone is this: wear a mask. — Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) November 9, 2020
But it won’t be easy to implement a mask mandate for the whole country, especially when 16 states still don’t have statewide mandates. (The AARP listed 33 states with mask mandates by the end of October. Utah, which issued its mandate on Monday, makes 34. Washington, DC, and Puerto Rico also have mandates.)
With limited federal powers at his disposal, Biden will have to convince everyone from state and local governments down to individual Americans that masks are one of the best and easiest ways to stop the spread of the coronavirus.
Where the president can — and can’t — order Americans to mask up
There are varying schools of thought about whether the president has the authority to issue a national mask mandate, as many other countries have. Some attempts to do so at the state and local level have been met with lawsuits and refusals to comply, as masks have become an increasingly politicized and contentious issue. Biden has said he will issue an executive order requiring masks to be worn on federal property.
Beyond that, Biden’s version of a national mask mandate, as spelled out in his new transition website, does not appear to come from him. Instead, he’s going to be “working with governors and mayors” to encourage them to issue their own mandates, as well as remind Americans to wear masks. While the majority of America’s governors have issued statewide mandates, 16 states have not — including Mississippi, which revoked its mask mandate in October (Gov. Tate Reeves is requiring masks in certain counties).
Though it’s hard to see a reality where states and localities run by Republicans work hand in hand with a Democratic president these days — even in the face of a virus that infects people regardless of their political leanings — many firmly Republican state governments have issued mask mandates once their constituents began getting sick and dying, most recently Utah on Monday. Others still seem to take pride in their obstinance, like South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem. Even in that state, however, local governments are trying to issue their own orders.
The majority of Americans approve of masks and mandates
While the outgoing administration made a show of not wearing masks even in indoor spaces with large numbers of people where social distancing was impossible, Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris were visible sticklers for masks and social distancing throughout the campaign. As president-elect, Biden has already announced a board of advisers full of experts in science and public health. Despite the divided country he will inherit, setting a new tone of adherence to recommended safety measures may encourage Americans to follow his lead.
Helping him out here is the fact that wearing masks and mask mandates have majority support, even among Americans who lean Republican — and this support predates the most recent, and worst, wave of coronavirus cases the nation is now battling.
There is also data showing that areas with high mask usage see fewer cases of Covid-19 and a decrease in new infections as the use of masks goes up. One recent study estimated that universal mask use in America could save 130,000 lives.
“Small acts add up to enormous achievements,” Biden said on Monday. “So let’s wear a mask. Let’s get to work.”


vox--2020-11-09--Here’s how Biden could undo Trump’s deregulation agenda

Cutting workplace safety inspections .
Allowing subpar health insurance plans to be sold to Americans .
Permitting tractor-trailer drivers to blow past previous driver-fatigue limits .
Waging war on birth control .
These deregulatory actions and others taken by President Donald Trump ’ s administration have adversely impacted the health and safety of Americans , as revealed in reporting for System Failure , an investigative series produced by the Center for Public Integrity and Vox .
Trump ’ s actions may not stick .
Now that President-elect Joe Biden is set to take office in January , he has a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some of Trump ’ s regulatory maneuvers .
Some could be more difficult to quickly put to use with a split Congress , however .
If Democrats take control of both houses of Congress , they ’ ll be able to quickly wipe out regulations pushed through in the last 60 legislative days of Trump ’ s term , because of the Congressional Review Act , part of the Contract With America that Newt Gingrich and House Republicans campaigned on in 1994 .
But , while Democrats maintained control of the House , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will hold the majority in the Senate .
All eyes will be on Georgia ’ s runoff for two Senate seats , which will happen in early January .
Neither of the Republican incumbents , Sens .
David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler , garnered a majority of the votes in last week ’ s election , forcing a runoff with Democrats Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock , respectively .
If Ossoff and Warnock ultimately prevail , it won ’ t be clear until January when the Congressional Review Act ’ s 60-day period @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how many days Congress meets between now and January 3 , when its current term ends — but experts predict it started sometime during the summer .
Since July 1 , for example , a Public Integrity analysis shows more than 1,000 regulatory changes have been published in the Federal Register , though only about 100 of them have risen to the level of being reviewed by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs , which is charged with sifting out “ significant ” regulations .
The changes that could be subject to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weakens methane emissions standards and one that opened the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling .
Trump and Republicans in Congress actually set in motion a number of rollbacks themselves when they took office , said Bethany Davis Noll , litigation director for the Institute for Policy Integrity at the New York University School of Law .
The Trump administration , more than any other in US history , aggressively pursued the rollback of federal regulations , particularly the ones put in place by President Barack Obama — including a rule meant to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ buying guns and a regulation aimed at keeping coal companies from dumping mining waste into streams .
Republicans used the Congressional Review Act to undo at least 14 of the Obama administration ’ s rules .
Before Trump took office , the law had only been used once .
Biden has already said that , if he wins , he plans to roll back more than 100 Trump administration public health and environmental regulations , including his reversal of protections for transgender people .
We asked Davis Noll to explain how Biden will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election .
This interview , conducted before the November 3 election , has been edited for length and clarity .
Our reporting with Vox showed that the Trump administration made a number of regulatory maneuvers that had an adverse effect on the health and safety of Americans .
If Biden is elected , what options will his administration have if he wants to undo some of what Trump has done ?
There ’ s a slew of options , starting with issuing quick rollbacks of the rollbacks .
And the reason I say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them quickly is because there was , often with these rules , a very robust record in place for the Obama-era rule — and then the Trump administration rolled it back with some cursory explanation .
The Biden administration can then pull that record up from the previous Obama administration rule and update it .
And it should be pretty simple to say , “ This record still works .
You know , there hasn ’ t been that much time that has passed , and this rule that was vastly beneficial to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ idea.
” So that ’ s one thing .
In court , there ’ s a whole bunch of cases pending on Trump-era rules , and I would imagine that , in many of those cases , the Department of Justice will ask for a pause on litigation .
Because the new agency isn ’ t going to want to defend the Trump-era rule .
They ’ re going to want to figure things out and work on these rollbacks .
And so we won ’ t see decisions out of court affirming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ll see if the Congressional Review Act is an option too .
Congress has to be aligned with the president , so both House and Senate have to have Democratic majorities .
In March 2019 , your report “ Regulation in Transition ” outlined some of the aggressive tools Trump had used to roll back Obama-era regulations .
You found that , through some strategies that other presidents had not used in the past , “ the Trump administration was able to reach a far greater proportion of regulations finalized during Obama ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ under prior practices.
” What did you find in your research , and how does it affect the average American ?
What Ricky Revesz and I found in this paper is that the Trump administration has used these rollback strategies just to a much greater extent than ever previously used — more than any administration had previously used them .
And that means two things .
One , it means now there ’ s this road map that the next administration is going to be expected to at least think about following .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ this tit-for-tat strategy going on between the two parties , it continues — and it accelerates , if anything .
So it means that the new administration is under a lot of pressure to issue rules as quickly as possible .
The other thing that it does is it kind of puts us in this flip-flop world .
It ’ s this era of partisan back-and-forth that is just very volatile .
It means you can ’ t , as an agency , issue rules that will be long-lasting without this speedy work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regulated industry is it creates a volatile atmosphere , and I think most people would agree that it ’ s better for our industry to not have that .
Because we want our business leaders to be thinking about innovation and investment instead of things like , “ What ’ s the regulation going to look like tomorrow ?
” To be clear , these are actions taken in the executive branch , without Congress weighing in , correct ?
Yeah , we ’ re talking about agency regulations .
And another thing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to 30 years is presidents have more and more turned to their agencies to make policy , because we can ’ t get much out of Congress these days .
There ’ s just massive gridlock there .
It ’ s been there for a while , and it seems like it ’ s continuing .
There was this really great article written by Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan , when she was a law professor , called “ Presidential Administration , ” back in 2001 .
It was about the Clinton administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had basically turned to its agencies to make policy because of congressional gridlock .
And she predicted that presidents would do that more and more .
And we ’ ve definitely seen that .
They said that about Obama , that he did this more than any prior president .
And now with Trump , they ’ re saying he ’ s gone to his agencies even more than any prior president to make policy , because he can ’ t get anything out of Congress .
Like with the Affordable Care Act @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t happen .
And so he ’ s just chipping away at the Affordable Care Act through rulemaking .
That ’ s a lot of power concentrated in one branch of government .
So Trump found a new , more aggressive way of rolling back his predecessor ’ s regulations .
Did he set a precedent that he ’ s going to regret if Biden wins ?
Yeah , I mean , he used the Congressional Review Act — the administration , plus Congress — used the Congressional Review Act to roll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issued at the end of the Obama term .
Even though we don ’ t know what ’ s going to happen with the election , that ’ s already had a huge impact on the end of the Trump administration .
At the end of the first term , for example , the vehicle emissions rule that was finalized in April of this year was , by some accounts , rushed out because they were afraid of the Congressional Review Act .
“ The whole country is worried about the pandemic , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ roll back vehicle emissions regulations ” Our June analysis found that , since Trump declared the coronavirus a national emergency in March , the White House signed off on or was reviewing more than 250 temporary or permanent regulatory actions .
How does this compare to past administrations ?
It ’ s pretty typical that administrations issue a lot of rules in the final days .
That happens a lot .
I have definitely not done an empirical study on how close the Trump administration is to prior administrations , but it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s new that it ’ s happening in the middle of a pandemic .
It ’ s definitely something to behold when the whole country is worried about the pandemic , and these agencies are issuing rules that roll back vehicle emissions regulations .
The priorities don ’ t seem like they ’ re in the right place .
Do you think they ’ re trying to take advantage of the fact that people are preoccupied by the pandemic ?
I guess I can ’ t really say what the intent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would have issued these rollbacks anyway .
I ’ m sure the pandemic didn ’ t change that .
It ’ s just something else , especially when it ’ s a respiratory illness that ’ s affecting the country , to have agencies issuing rules that roll back emissions cuts that would have helped , that would have cleaned up the air .
It just makes it more striking how these agencies are acting far outside the scope of what Congress envisioned .
You study litigation and keep track of Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ courts play in the regulation landscape .
What have you found so far about the Trump administration ?
What I ’ ve been tracking is court decisions on agency actions to either roll back regulations or make policy for the president .
Like I was saying before , presidents use their agencies to make policy .
One of the best ways to see if it ’ s working is : What ’ s the success rate in court ?
The overall success rate right now is 15.6 percent .
And it stands in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scholars have looked at prior administrations and just consistently , across the board , have found that agencies win 70 percent of the time , more or less .
And so to see a win rate now of 15.6 percent , it ’ s very surprising .
It ’ s very , very shocking .
Also , you can sort on my tracker for deregulation , and the win rate for deregulatory cases is 13.8 percent .
So it ’ s a little lower .
So the agencies are not doing very well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that is ?
There ’ s two big issues that consistently have come up .
One is agencies are acting outside their statutory authority .
And two is they are not providing the required explanation for what they ’ re doing .
There ’ s this standard that requires agencies to provide a reasoned explanation for their decision , and in many cases , the agencies are doing something that ’ s actually harmful .
With the vehicle emissions rollback , the baseline was a rule that was going to improve fuel economy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from cars .
And so if you roll that back , what you ’ re doing is you ’ re increasing greenhouse gas emissions from cars and reducing fuel economy .
So that ’ s a harmful thing .
And it ’ s not that easy to give an explanation for that .
That case is pending .
But there are a whole bunch of other cases that have already been decided that are like that , where the agency is doing something that ’ s actually harmful , and they haven ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they try to explain why they did what they did .
What else should we keep an eye on if Biden wins ?
You ’ ll see agencies getting back to doing their job , like looking at their statutes , which often say something like “ reduce emissions , ” in the case of the Environmental Protection Agency , or “ regulate this thing that is harmful to the public.
” And you ’ ll see agencies getting back to doing the business of the agencies .
That ’ s what we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the data shows that that ’ s what we haven ’ t been seeing these last four years .
We haven ’ t been seeing agencies interested in implementing the statutes as Congress wrote them .
They ’ re trying to implement President Trump ’ s policies , and often those policies are not what Congress intended .
If we ’ re asking about what we imagine we could see out of a new administration , I predict agencies will go back to doing their jobs .
I don ’ t think that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I think those bounds are still there , those guardrails .
Their importance has been reaffirmed in the last few years and I don ’ t think the Trump administration has been successful at kicking them down .
So I don ’ t imagine that the next administration would want to act outside those bounds .

Cutting workplace safety inspections. Allowing subpar health insurance plans to be sold to Americans. Permitting tractor-trailer drivers to blow past previous driver-fatigue limits. Waging war on birth control.
These deregulatory actions and others taken by President Donald Trump’s administration have adversely impacted the health and safety of Americans, as revealed in reporting for System Failure, an investigative series produced by the Center for Public Integrity and Vox.
Trump’s actions may not stick. Now that President-elect Joe Biden is set to take office in January, he has a few tools at his disposal to undo some of Trump’s regulatory maneuvers. Some could be more difficult to quickly put to use with a split Congress, however.
If Democrats take control of both houses of Congress, they’ll be able to quickly wipe out regulations pushed through in the last 60 legislative days of Trump’s term, because of the Congressional Review Act, part of the Contract With America that Newt Gingrich and House Republicans campaigned on in 1994.
But, while Democrats maintained control of the House, it’s still unclear which party will hold the majority in the Senate. All eyes will be on Georgia’s runoff for two Senate seats, which will happen in early January. Neither of the Republican incumbents, Sens. David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler, garnered a majority of the votes in last week’s election, forcing a runoff with Democrats Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock, respectively.
If Ossoff and Warnock ultimately prevail, it won’t be clear until January when the Congressional Review Act’s 60-day period began — because it all depends on how many days Congress meets between now and January 3, when its current term ends — but experts predict it started sometime during the summer.
Since July 1, for example, a Public Integrity analysis shows more than 1,000 regulatory changes have been published in the Federal Register, though only about 100 of them have risen to the level of being reviewed by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, which is charged with sifting out “significant” regulations. The changes that could be subject to the Congressional Review Act include one that weakens methane emissions standards and one that opened the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling.
Trump and Republicans in Congress actually set in motion a number of rollbacks themselves when they took office, said Bethany Davis Noll, litigation director for the Institute for Policy Integrity at the New York University School of Law.
The Trump administration, more than any other in US history, aggressively pursued the rollback of federal regulations, particularly the ones put in place by President Barack Obama — including a rule meant to prevent people with mental health issues from buying guns and a regulation aimed at keeping coal companies from dumping mining waste into streams.
Republicans used the Congressional Review Act to undo at least 14 of the Obama administration’s rules. Before Trump took office, the law had only been used once.
Biden has already said that, if he wins, he plans to roll back more than 100 Trump administration public health and environmental regulations, including his reversal of protections for transgender people. We asked Davis Noll to explain how Biden will execute these rollbacks if he takes the election.
This interview, conducted before the November 3 election, has been edited for length and clarity.
Sarah Kleiner
Our reporting with Vox showed that the Trump administration made a number of regulatory maneuvers that had an adverse effect on the health and safety of Americans. If Biden is elected, what options will his administration have if he wants to undo some of what Trump has done?
Davis Noll
There’s a slew of options, starting with issuing quick rollbacks of the rollbacks. And the reason I say it’s an option to issue them quickly is because there was, often with these rules, a very robust record in place for the Obama-era rule — and then the Trump administration rolled it back with some cursory explanation.
The Biden administration can then pull that record up from the previous Obama administration rule and update it. And it should be pretty simple to say, “This record still works. You know, there hasn’t been that much time that has passed, and this rule that was vastly beneficial to the American people is still a good idea.” So that’s one thing.
In court, there’s a whole bunch of cases pending on Trump-era rules, and I would imagine that, in many of those cases, the Department of Justice will ask for a pause on litigation. Because the new agency isn’t going to want to defend the Trump-era rule. They’re going to want to figure things out and work on these rollbacks. And so we won’t see decisions out of court affirming Trump-era rules. And then we’ll see if the Congressional Review Act is an option too. Congress has to be aligned with the president, so both House and Senate have to have Democratic majorities.
Sarah Kleiner
In March 2019, your report “Regulation in Transition” outlined some of the aggressive tools Trump had used to roll back Obama-era regulations. You found that, through some strategies that other presidents had not used in the past, “the Trump administration was able to reach a far greater proportion of regulations finalized during Obama’s presidency than would have been possible under prior practices.” What did you find in your research, and how does it affect the average American?
Davis Noll
What Ricky Revesz and I found in this paper is that the Trump administration has used these rollback strategies just to a much greater extent than ever previously used — more than any administration had previously used them. And that means two things.
One, it means now there’s this road map that the next administration is going to be expected to at least think about following. Because usually when you’ve got this tit-for-tat strategy going on between the two parties, it continues — and it accelerates, if anything. So it means that the new administration is under a lot of pressure to issue rules as quickly as possible.
This series was made possible through a collaboration with the Center for Public Integrity, a DC-based nonprofit newsroom. Get updates on their work. You can also support Vox with a financial contribution. Learn more.
The other thing that it does is it kind of puts us in this flip-flop world. It’s this era of partisan back-and-forth that is just very volatile. It means you can’t, as an agency, issue rules that will be long-lasting without this speedy work.
So what it does to the regulated industry is it creates a volatile atmosphere, and I think most people would agree that it’s better for our industry to not have that. Because we want our business leaders to be thinking about innovation and investment instead of things like, “What’s the regulation going to look like tomorrow?”
Sarah Kleiner
To be clear, these are actions taken in the executive branch, without Congress weighing in, correct?
Davis Noll
Yeah, we’re talking about agency regulations. And another thing that has happened in the last 20 to 30 years is presidents have more and more turned to their agencies to make policy, because we can’t get much out of Congress these days. There’s just massive gridlock there. It’s been there for a while, and it seems like it’s continuing.
There was this really great article written by Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, when she was a law professor, called “Presidential Administration,” back in 2001. It was about the Clinton administration. And she said the Clinton administration had basically turned to its agencies to make policy because of congressional gridlock. And she predicted that presidents would do that more and more.
And we’ve definitely seen that. They said that about Obama, that he did this more than any prior president. And now with Trump, they’re saying he’s gone to his agencies even more than any prior president to make policy, because he can’t get anything out of Congress. Like with the Affordable Care Act repeal that he wanted — that didn’t happen. And so he’s just chipping away at the Affordable Care Act through rulemaking.
Sarah Kleiner
That’s a lot of power concentrated in one branch of government. So Trump found a new, more aggressive way of rolling back his predecessor’s regulations. Did he set a precedent that he’s going to regret if Biden wins?
Davis Noll
Yeah, I mean, he used the Congressional Review Act — the administration, plus Congress — used the Congressional Review Act to roll back a bunch of rules that were issued at the end of the Obama term. Even though we don’t know what’s going to happen with the election, that’s already had a huge impact on the end of the Trump administration. At the end of the first term, for example, the vehicle emissions rule that was finalized in April of this year was, by some accounts, rushed out because they were afraid of the Congressional Review Act.
“The whole country is worried about the pandemic, and these agencies are issuing rules that roll back vehicle emissions regulations”
Sarah Kleiner
Our June analysis found that, since Trump declared the coronavirus a national emergency in March, the White House signed off on or was reviewing more than 250 temporary or permanent regulatory actions. How does this compare to past administrations?
Davis Noll
It’s pretty typical that administrations issue a lot of rules in the final days. That happens a lot. I have definitely not done an empirical study on how close the Trump administration is to prior administrations, but it’s not a new thing. Maybe it’s new that it’s happening in the middle of a pandemic.
It’s definitely something to behold when the whole country is worried about the pandemic, and these agencies are issuing rules that roll back vehicle emissions regulations. The priorities don’t seem like they’re in the right place.
Sarah Kleiner
Do you think they’re trying to take advantage of the fact that people are preoccupied by the pandemic?
Davis Noll
I guess I can’t really say what the intent is. But I also think they would have issued these rollbacks anyway. I’m sure the pandemic didn’t change that. It’s just something else, especially when it’s a respiratory illness that’s affecting the country, to have agencies issuing rules that roll back emissions cuts that would have helped, that would have cleaned up the air.
It just makes it more striking how these agencies are acting far outside the scope of what Congress envisioned.
Sarah Kleiner
You study litigation and keep track of Trump’s regulatory win-loss rate and what role courts play in the regulation landscape. What have you found so far about the Trump administration?
Davis Noll
What I’ve been tracking is court decisions on agency actions to either roll back regulations or make policy for the president. Like I was saying before, presidents use their agencies to make policy. One of the best ways to see if it’s working is: What’s the success rate in court? The overall success rate right now is 15.6 percent. And it stands in stark contrast to prior administrations.
Prior scholars have looked at prior administrations and just consistently, across the board, have found that agencies win 70 percent of the time, more or less. And so to see a win rate now of 15.6 percent, it’s very surprising. It’s very, very shocking. Also, you can sort on my tracker for deregulation, and the win rate for deregulatory cases is 13.8 percent. So it’s a little lower. So the agencies are not doing very well in court.
Sarah Kleiner
Why do you think that is?
Davis Noll
There’s two big issues that consistently have come up. One is agencies are acting outside their statutory authority. And two is they are not providing the required explanation for what they’re doing. There’s this standard that requires agencies to provide a reasoned explanation for their decision, and in many cases, the agencies are doing something that’s actually harmful.
With the vehicle emissions rollback, the baseline was a rule that was going to improve fuel economy over time and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from cars. And so if you roll that back, what you’re doing is you’re increasing greenhouse gas emissions from cars and reducing fuel economy. So that’s a harmful thing. And it’s not that easy to give an explanation for that. That case is pending.
But there are a whole bunch of other cases that have already been decided that are like that, where the agency is doing something that’s actually harmful, and they haven’t been succeeding in court, when they try to explain why they did what they did.
Sarah Kleiner
What else should we keep an eye on if Biden wins?
Davis Noll
You’ll see agencies getting back to doing their job, like looking at their statutes, which often say something like “reduce emissions,” in the case of the Environmental Protection Agency, or “regulate this thing that is harmful to the public.” And you’ll see agencies getting back to doing the business of the agencies. That’s what we’ve been missing.
I think the data shows that that’s what we haven’t been seeing these last four years. We haven’t been seeing agencies interested in implementing the statutes as Congress wrote them. They’re trying to implement President Trump’s policies, and often those policies are not what Congress intended.
If we’re asking about what we imagine we could see out of a new administration, I predict agencies will go back to doing their jobs. I don’t think that’s like a tit-for-tat thing.
I think those bounds are still there, those guardrails. Their importance has been reaffirmed in the last few years and I don’t think the Trump administration has been successful at kicking them down. So I don’t imagine that the next administration would want to act outside those bounds.


vox--2020-11-09--Armenia and Azerbaijan’s war is entering a “more dangerous and potentially tragic” stage

The war between Armenia and Azerbaijan over a long-disputed territory has entered a dangerous and politically fraught stage , one that could see the region ’ s deadliest conflict in two decades get a whole lot worse .
For the past six weeks , the Caucasus rivals have engaged in their second war over Nagorno-Karabakh , a mountainous territory about the size of Delaware .
The area is internationally recognized as part of Azerbaijan , but it ’ s claimed and governed by ethnic Armenians .
The two sides haven ’ t reached a lasting diplomatic resolution to the dispute @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 30,000 people or more , ended in a 1994 ceasefire .
This conflict — which since September 27 has killed anywhere from 1,000 to 5,000 people , including civilians — is a lot different from the last one .
For one , Azerbaijan has the unequivocal backing of Turkey .
Turkey shares deep linguistic , ethnic , and religious ties with its neighbor , and has now shared with it weaponry and troops for the fight .
Azerbaijan also has advanced technology this time around , including drones that dive-bomb to kill opposing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ win , which is why ethnic Armenians control Nagorno-Karabakh ; this time , though , it looks like Azerbaijan may prevail .
On Sunday , Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev claimed his military overtook Shusha , which experts say is considered the cultural capital of the breakaway territory .
His country lost the city during the first war , and its recapture sent hundreds of people into the streets of the Azerbaijani capital of Baku to celebrate .
“ It means more to the Azerbaijani people than any other part of Karabakh , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” the region ’ s capital , said Roya Talibova , an Azerbaijani who was internally displaced by the violence of the first war and is now a PhD student at the University of Michigan .
Many of Azerbaijan ’ s best-known composers , poets , and writers are from Shusha , she noted , which is why “ you just can not have lived and breathed in Azerbaijan without feeling that attachment to the city.
” On Monday , Azerbaijan ’ s Ministry of Defense released a video showing the country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ building and draped over a city sign , and troops saluting in a square .
The country of Armenia and the ethnic Armenian government of Nagorno-Karabakh , initially disputed Azerbaijan ’ s claims .
Nikol Pashinyan , Armenia ’ s president , tweeted on Monday that “ The battles for # Shushi continue , ” using the Armenian name for the city .
But then Vahram Poghosyan , a spokesperson for the ethnic Armenian Nagorno-Karabakh leader , said in a statement on his Facebook page that “ We have to admit that a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the city of Shushi is completely out of our control.
” Kevork Oskanian , an expert on the dispute at the University of Birmingham in the UK , told me this means “ fighting has moved from what was the captured territory around Nagorno-Karabakh into the heart of the region .
That ’ s qualitatively different , also in terms of the ongoing humanitarian catastrophe.
” In other words , the war was already bad .
What might come next could be far worse .
The next stage of fighting could be “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ city of Shusha ( or Shushi ) , the region ’ s second-largest settlement , is located high on a hilltop roughly nine miles south of Stepanakert .
It basically oversees the capital , which means Azerbaijan ’ s forces could use it as a base from which to shell the city .
Azerbaijan having such an advantageous position , according to Oskanian , would make “ holding on to [ Stepanakert ] much more difficult ” for the Armenians .
“ It would be a major setback.
” Locals seem to see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nagorno-Karabakh ’ s ethnic Armenian population has already fled the territory , experts estimate , and some dispatches indicate Stepanakert is “ now nearly empty.
” Videos have surfaced online of major traffic jams as civilians flee fighting , giving credence to unconfirmed reports of a growing exodus from the Stepanakert area .
It ’ s unsurprising , especially as other videos circulate allegedly showing Azerbaijani troops summarily executing Armenians .
If Azerbaijani troops move further into the cultural and regional capitals , experts are concerned the conflict could see ethnic cleansing of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ marking a “ more dangerous and potentially tragic ” stage of the war , Oskanian said .
Talibova , the University of Michigan PhD student from Azerbaijan , argues the situation isn ’ t so dire .
“ I think the intention is not to harm the civilians and let them move out while the clashes last , ” she told me .
“ If the Azerbaijanis make the same mistake , the displaced Armenian community of Nagorno-Karabakh will relive the horrors of Azerbaijani [ internally displaced persons ] for years to come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to pay a high price for the same mistake.
” “ Once the territories are taken back , they will be asked to return , ” Talibova said .
Even if ethnic cleansing doesn ’ t come to pass , though , the conflict could still worsen .
Russia has a defense treaty with Armenia , which it could choose to honor if Azerbaijan neared a complete takeover of Nagorno-Karabakh .
Moscow may also decide to enter the fray on its own .
On Sunday , a Russian military helicopter was shot down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crew members and injuring another .
Azerbaijan admitted responsibility , but claimed it was an accident .
The Russian helicopter was likely part of the country ’ s deployment to Armenia to defend against a full-scale invasion .
If Russia were to step in , Turkey might also since it backs Azerbaijan .
At that point , Turkey — a NATO ally — might face off against Russia in the Caucasus , perhaps escalating the conflict into a greater global problem .
The main hope now , experts say , is for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ differences and come to some sort of political agreement .
But three previous attempts at ceasefires — each individually brokered by Russia , France , and the US , the three nations charged with finding a peaceful resolution to the conflict since the 1990s — quickly failed .
And with Azerbaijan ’ s new gains in Nagorno-Karabakh , it has little incentive to stop fighting now , despite fresh efforts .
“ The temptation to go for full military control over the whole of Nagorno-Karabakh is more likely , ” said Laurence Broers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chatham House think tank in London .
Azerbaijan ’ s government seemed to confirm that .
“ We are pretty much sure we will be going until the end , as the president said — we will be liberating all the occupied territories of Azerbaijan from occupation , ” Leyla Abdullayeva , a spokesperson for Azerbaijan ’ s foreign ministry , told Al Jazeera on Sunday .
If that ’ s the goal , then much more bloody fighting awaits the militaries of Azerbaijan and Armenia , as well as the people of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ higher in a conflict that won ’ t deescalate or go away , ” Broers told me .

The war between Armenia and Azerbaijan over a long-disputed territory has entered a dangerous and politically fraught stage, one that could see the region’s deadliest conflict in two decades get a whole lot worse.
For the past six weeks, the Caucasus rivals have engaged in their second war over Nagorno-Karabakh, a mountainous territory about the size of Delaware. The area is internationally recognized as part of Azerbaijan, but it’s claimed and governed by ethnic Armenians. The two sides haven’t reached a lasting diplomatic resolution to the dispute since the first war, that killed 30,000 people or more, ended in a 1994 ceasefire.
This conflict — which since September 27 has killed anywhere from 1,000 to 5,000 people, including civilians — is a lot different from the last one.
For one, Azerbaijan has the unequivocal backing of Turkey. Turkey shares deep linguistic, ethnic, and religious ties with its neighbor, and has now shared with it weaponry and troops for the fight. Azerbaijan also has advanced technology this time around, including drones that dive-bomb to kill opposing forces. The last conflict saw Armenia win, which is why ethnic Armenians control Nagorno-Karabakh; this time, though, it looks like Azerbaijan may prevail.
On Sunday, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev claimed his military overtook Shusha, which experts say is considered the cultural capital of the breakaway territory. His country lost the city during the first war, and its recapture sent hundreds of people into the streets of the Azerbaijani capital of Baku to celebrate.
“It means more to the Azerbaijani people than any other part of Karabakh, I’d dare say even including Stepanakert,” the region’s capital, said Roya Talibova, an Azerbaijani who was internally displaced by the violence of the first war and is now a PhD student at the University of Michigan.
Many of Azerbaijan’s best-known composers, poets, and writers are from Shusha, she noted, which is why “you just cannot have lived and breathed in Azerbaijan without feeling that attachment to the city.”
Azərbaycan xalqı Şuşanın geri qaytarılmasını belə qeyd edir pic.twitter.com/Dh0ELU9njk — Meydan TV (@MeydanTV) November 8, 2020
On Monday, Azerbaijan’s Ministry of Defense released a video showing the country’s flag raised above a Shusha building and draped over a city sign, and troops saluting in a square.
The country of Armenia and the ethnic Armenian government of Nagorno-Karabakh, initially disputed Azerbaijan’s claims. Nikol Pashinyan, Armenia’s president, tweeted on Monday that “The battles for #Shushi continue,” using the Armenian name for the city.
But then Vahram Poghosyan, a spokesperson for the ethnic Armenian Nagorno-Karabakh leader, said in a statement on his Facebook page that “We have to admit that a chain of failures still haunts us and the city of Shushi is completely out of our control.”
The battles for #Shushi continue. — Nikol Pashinyan (@NikolPashinyan) November 9, 2020
That’s important, and very troubling, news.
Kevork Oskanian, an expert on the dispute at the University of Birmingham in the UK, told me this means “fighting has moved from what was the captured territory around Nagorno-Karabakh into the heart of the region. That’s qualitatively different, also in terms of the ongoing humanitarian catastrophe.”
In other words, the war was already bad. What might come next could be far worse.
The next stage of fighting could be “more dangerous and potentially tragic”
The city of Shusha (or Shushi), the region’s second-largest settlement, is located high on a hilltop roughly nine miles south of Stepanakert. It basically oversees the capital, which means Azerbaijan’s forces could use it as a base from which to shell the city.
Azerbaijan having such an advantageous position, according to Oskanian, would make “holding on to [Stepanakert] much more difficult” for the Armenians. “It would be a major setback.”
Locals seem to see it that way. About two-thirds of Nagorno-Karabakh’s ethnic Armenian population has already fled the territory, experts estimate, and some dispatches indicate Stepanakert is “now nearly empty.”
Videos have surfaced online of major traffic jams as civilians flee fighting, giving credence to unconfirmed reports of a growing exodus from the Stepanakert area. It’s unsurprising, especially as other videos circulate allegedly showing Azerbaijani troops summarily executing Armenians.
Tysiące samochodów kierowało się wczoraj wieczorem ze Stepanakertu w góry. Tragedia tysięcy rodzin. To jest prawdziwy obraz wojny. pic.twitter.com/5cHSO5p0uV — Witold Repetowicz (@WitoldRPL) November 8, 2020
If Azerbaijani troops move further into the cultural and regional capitals, experts are concerned the conflict could see ethnic cleansing of the people who have remained behind, marking a “more dangerous and potentially tragic” stage of the war, Oskanian said.
Talibova, the University of Michigan PhD student from Azerbaijan, argues the situation isn’t so dire.
“I think the intention is not to harm the civilians and let them move out while the clashes last,” she told me. “If the Azerbaijanis make the same mistake, the displaced Armenian community of Nagorno-Karabakh will relive the horrors of Azerbaijani [internally displaced persons] for years to come, and Azerbaijan will one day have to pay a high price for the same mistake.”
“Once the territories are taken back, they will be asked to return,” Talibova said.
Even if ethnic cleansing doesn’t come to pass, though, the conflict could still worsen.
Russia has a defense treaty with Armenia, which it could choose to honor if Azerbaijan neared a complete takeover of Nagorno-Karabakh. Moscow may also decide to enter the fray on its own. On Sunday, a Russian military helicopter was shot down over Armenia on Sunday, killing two crew members and injuring another. Azerbaijan admitted responsibility, but claimed it was an accident. The Russian helicopter was likely part of the country’s deployment to Armenia to defend against a full-scale invasion.
If Russia were to step in, Turkey might also since it backs Azerbaijan. At that point, Turkey — a NATO ally — might face off against Russia in the Caucasus, perhaps escalating the conflict into a greater global problem.
The main hope now, experts say, is for the two warring countries to set aside their differences and come to some sort of political agreement. But three previous attempts at ceasefires — each individually brokered by Russia, France, and the US, the three nations charged with finding a peaceful resolution to the conflict since the 1990s — quickly failed. And with Azerbaijan’s new gains in Nagorno-Karabakh, it has little incentive to stop fighting now, despite fresh efforts.
“The temptation to go for full military control over the whole of Nagorno-Karabakh is more likely,” said Laurence Broers, the Caucasus program director at the Chatham House think tank in London.
Azerbaijan’s government seemed to confirm that. “We are pretty much sure we will be going until the end, as the president said — we will be liberating all the occupied territories of Azerbaijan from occupation,” Leyla Abdullayeva, a spokesperson for Azerbaijan’s foreign ministry, told Al Jazeera on Sunday.
If that’s the goal, then much more bloody fighting awaits the militaries of Azerbaijan and Armenia, as well as the people of Nagorno-Karabakh.
“The stakes keep getting higher in a conflict that won’t deescalate or go away,” Broers told me.