vox--2020-05-05--Trump believes Americans are “starting to feel good” about Covid-19. They’re not.

President Donald Trump gave an interview to the New York Post Monday , in which he lavished praised upon himself , seemed to suggest the worst of the pandemic was behind the US , and projected a hope and optimism about the coronavirus that does not appear to be shared by the American public .
“ The one thing that the pandemic has taught us is that I was right , ” Trump said .
“ You know , I had people say , ‘ No , no , it ’ s good .
You keep — you do this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really agreeing with me .
And that includes medicine and other things , you know.
” It would have been great if Trump had been right — if he were , the novel coronavirus would be under control ; the president was adamant in February that “ like a miracle , it will disappear.
” The number of confirmed coronavirus cases would be in the double digits ; and the number of deaths would be in the single digits .
Perhaps a drug like hydroxychloroquine would have cleared any lingering disease , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And millions of people currently without work would be earning money to provide for themselves and their families .
Instead , the US death toll is approaching 70,000 as of May 5 , and the president himself has revised his estimate of the number of people who will ultimately lose their lives , telling Fox News on Sunday , “ We ’ re going to lose anywhere from 75 , 80 , to 100,000 people.
” As Vox ’ s Aaron Rupar has explained , the daily number of new confirmed cases and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for weeks , suggesting that the US ’ s style of social distancing can only reduce the spread of the disease so much .
( Other countries , like Italy , more successfully contained their outbreaks with more aggressive shelter-in-place orders and measures such as contact tracing of the disease . )
Deaths and infections in America will likely increase now that social distancing measures are being relaxed .
Despite all this , Trump told the Post , “ I think [ Americans are ] starting to feel good now .
The country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ millions of lives , I think.
” Americans aren ’ t starting to feel good — and should be concerned as nonessential businesses begin to reopen It isn ’ t clear what ’ s making the president feel that Americans are “ starting to feel good , ” but it certainly isn ’ t polls .
A Washington Post/University of Maryland April 28 to May 3 poll released Tuesday found that 63 percent of Americans are worried about contracting Covid-19 — and that 38 percent believe “ the worst is yet to come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 30 percent said we ’ re currently living through the worst period ) .
The same poll , which surveyed 1,005 US adults by telephone and has a 3.5 percentage point margin of error , found that most Americans are uncomfortable with nonessential businesses reopening — for instance , 78 percent and 67 percent said they ’ d be uncomfortable going to a restaurant and a clothing store , respectively , should they be open .
And 44 percent said they currently feel “ uncomfortable ” going to the grocery store .
Other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the pandemic ; an Axios-Ispos poll released Tuesday found most Americans expressing concern Covid-19 deaths are worse than has been reported , while an NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll released last week found half of all Americans have lost work or wages due to the coronavirus .
In short , things are not going well .
But Trump maintains the opposite is true , and has been increasingly speaking as if the coronavirus is an issue that the country has conquered and can now move past .
Sunday , he tweeted , “ And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and powerful Plague , and the World was never to be the same again !
But America rose from this death and destruction , always remembering its many lost souls , and the lost souls all over the World , and became greater than ever before !
” Notably , all of that tweet is in the past tense .
In his interview with the Post , Trump also seemed to suggest the problem was in the past , saying , “ We did the right thing and now we ’ re bringing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thing was n't done , and anti-coronavirus work still needs doing .
Test kits are still in short supply and high demand — so much so that Maryland has the ones it smuggled in from South Korea housed at a secret location under armed guard .
A national contract tracing system has yet to be established — something that is a particularly pressing need now that states are beginning to reopen .
Rather than address these needs in any substantive way , Trump has been dismissive and has adopted the sort of sunny @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the pandemic .
He has certainly said , as he did during a Fox News town hall Sunday , that the death toll will be high , but he called death numbers in the 100,000 range a “ successful ” outcome .
And he is also giving the American people statements like something else he told the Post Monday : “ I think there ’ s a great optimism .
I don ’ t know if you see it , but I think there ’ s a great optimism now.
” Experts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CDC documents first reported on by the New York Times Monday show projections of a steep increase in daily deaths beginning May 14 , and that 3,000 Americans will be dying per day by June 1 .
Daily new cases could reach 200,000 by that same date , the documents claim .
Justin Lessler , the creator of the model and an associate professor at Johns Hopkins told the Washington Post the data was a preliminary analysis not yet ready for public release .
But Lessler also said he believes 100,000 new cases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and that “ There are reopening scenarios where it could get out of control very quickly.
” Despite the fact that many states are reopening businesses , the pandemic is not over and the future does not look bright — particularly if reopening goes as poorly as is projected .
Nevertheless , Trump continues to make unhelpful assertions , like telling the New York Post , “ We ’ ll open it up and I think your fourth quarter is going to be very good.
” Every day at Vox , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

President Donald Trump gave an interview to the New York Post Monday, in which he lavished praised upon himself, seemed to suggest the worst of the pandemic was behind the US, and projected a hope and optimism about the coronavirus that does not appear to be shared by the American public.
“The one thing that the pandemic has taught us is that I was right,” Trump said. “You know, I had people say, ‘No, no, it’s good. You keep — you do this and that.’ Now those people are really agreeing with me. And that includes medicine and other things, you know.”
It would have been great if Trump had been right — if he were, the novel coronavirus would be under control; the president was adamant in February that “like a miracle, it will disappear.” The number of confirmed coronavirus cases would be in the double digits; and the number of deaths would be in the single digits. Perhaps a drug like hydroxychloroquine would have cleared any lingering disease, and the world would have a vaccine. And millions of people currently without work would be earning money to provide for themselves and their families.
Instead, the US death toll is approaching 70,000 as of May 5, and the president himself has revised his estimate of the number of people who will ultimately lose their lives, telling Fox News on Sunday, “We’re going to lose anywhere from 75, 80, to 100,000 people.”
As Vox’s Aaron Rupar has explained, the daily number of new confirmed cases and Covid-19 related deaths has remained fairly steady for weeks, suggesting that the US’s style of social distancing can only reduce the spread of the disease so much. (Other countries, like Italy, more successfully contained their outbreaks with more aggressive shelter-in-place orders and measures such as contact tracing of the disease.) Deaths and infections in America will likely increase now that social distancing measures are being relaxed.
Despite all this, Trump told the Post, “I think [Americans are] starting to feel good now. The country’s opening again. We saved millions of lives, I think.”
Americans aren’t starting to feel good — and should be concerned as nonessential businesses begin to reopen
It isn’t clear what’s making the president feel that Americans are “starting to feel good,” but it certainly isn’t polls.
A Washington Post/University of Maryland April 28 to May 3 poll released Tuesday found that 63 percent of Americans are worried about contracting Covid-19 — and that 38 percent believe “the worst is yet to come” with respect to the pandemic (30 percent said we’re currently living through the worst period).
The same poll, which surveyed 1,005 US adults by telephone and has a 3.5 percentage point margin of error, found that most Americans are uncomfortable with nonessential businesses reopening — for instance, 78 percent and 67 percent said they’d be uncomfortable going to a restaurant and a clothing store, respectively, should they be open. And 44 percent said they currently feel “uncomfortable” going to the grocery store.
Other recent polls found similar levels of anxiety about the pandemic; an Axios-Ipsos poll released Tuesday found most Americans expressing concern Covid-19 deaths are worse than has been reported, while an NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll released last week found half of all Americans have lost work or wages due to the coronavirus.
In short, things are not going well. But Trump maintains the opposite is true, and has been increasingly speaking as if the coronavirus is an issue that the country has conquered and can now move past.
Sunday, he tweeted, “And then came a Plague, a great and powerful Plague, and the World was never to be the same again! But America rose from this death and destruction, always remembering its many lost souls, and the lost souls all over the World, and became greater than ever before!”
Notably, all of that tweet is in the past tense. In his interview with the Post, Trump also seemed to suggest the problem was in the past, saying, “We did the right thing and now we’re bringing the country back.”
But the right thing wasn't done, and anti-coronavirus work still needs doing. Test kits are still in short supply and high demand — so much so that Maryland has the ones it smuggled in from South Korea housed at a secret location under armed guard. A national contract tracing system has yet to be established — something that is a particularly pressing need now that states are beginning to reopen.
Rather than address these needs in any substantive way, Trump has been dismissive and has adopted the sort of sunny outlook he had in the early days of the pandemic. He has certainly said, as he did during a Fox News town hall Sunday, that the death toll will be high, but he called death numbers in the 100,000 range a “successful” outcome. And he is also giving the American people statements like something else he told the Post Monday: “I think there’s a great optimism. I don’t know if you see it, but I think there’s a great optimism now.”
Governors should let roads and highway construction begin before heavy traffic starts, which will be soon. Some Governors never stopped, which proved to be very smart. They built and fixed roads during long no traffic periods. Also, saved big dollars! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 5, 2020
Experts, meanwhile, are pessimistic. Internal CDC documents first reported on by the New York Times Monday show projections of a steep increase in daily deaths beginning May 14, and that 3,000 Americans will be dying per day by June 1. Daily new cases could reach 200,000 by that same date, the documents claim. Justin Lessler, the creator of the model and an associate professor at Johns Hopkins told the Washington Post the data was a preliminary analysis not yet ready for public release. But Lessler also said he believes 100,000 new cases per day by June 1 is possible, and that “There are reopening scenarios where it could get out of control very quickly.”
Despite the fact that many states are reopening businesses, the pandemic is not over and the future does not look bright — particularly if reopening goes as poorly as is projected. Nevertheless, Trump continues to make unhelpful assertions, like telling the New York Post, “We’ll open it up and I think your fourth quarter is going to be very good.”


vox--2020-05-05--Trump just completely mischaracterized new models showing a coming surge in coronavirus deaths

As President Trump pushes for businesses to reopen — even though the US coronavirus outbreak is not under control — his response to two new models indicating that cases and deaths will increase in the coming weeks is to mischaracterize them .
The models are grim , with one projecting 135,000 Americans will die by early August , and the other estimating the US will see 3,000 daily deaths by June 1 .
Grilled about them on Tuesday by reporters ahead of his departure for a trip to Arizona , Trump dismissed them , falsely claiming they are based on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , if we did nothing .
“ We ’ re doing a lot of mitigation , ” Trump said .
“ And , frankly , when the people report back [ to work ] , they ’ re gon na be social distancing , and they ’ re gon na be washing their hands , and they ’ re gon na be doing the things that you ’ re supposed to do ... but that report is a no-mitigation report , and we are mitigating.
” But the fact is , the US @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a few weeks ago .
States are beginning to reopen nonessential businesses , and customers are beginning to patronize them .
And the two new models — one based on government data put together by the Federal Emergency Management Agency ( FEMA ) , and another by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington ( IHME ) — take this into account .
Both feature projections based on the relaxation of mitigation that Trump has championed by urging state governments to take steps to reopen businesses , even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ White House coronavirus task force ’ s gating criteria for doing so .
For instance , as the New York Times reports , the IHME ’ s new model , which estimates that the coronavirus will claim nearly 135,000 lives in the US by early August , states that its upward revision is based on “ rising mobility in most US states as well as the easing of social distancing measures expected in 31 states by May 11 , indicating that growing contacts among people will promote transmission of the coronavirus.
” ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US death toll will reach 3,000 by June 1 , a near doubling of the roughly 1,500 lives being claimed per day by the coronavirus right now . )
Trump ’ s comments indicate that he thinks workers being diligent about washing their hands and trying to keep distance from other people will be sufficient to slow the spread of the virus , but experts say that ’ s not the case .
Stay-at-home orders and the shutdown of most businesses haven ’ t so far been sufficient to bend the trajectory of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ merely gotten the country to a relative plateau in new cases and deaths .
This suggests the number of new cases and deaths will likely get worse as things reopen .
It is for these reasons that public health experts think it ’ s premature to relax stay-at-home orders .
But later during his comments outside the White House on Tuesday , Trump indicated he thinks there ’ s no choice but to try to get the economy going again .
Asked by a reporter if he ’ s concerned that deaths are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ social distancing guidelines too early , Trump responded that he isn ’ t because “ the fact that we ’ re letting people go and go to their jobs — they have to do it.
” “ You know , if they held people any longer with the shutdowns , you ’ re going to lose people that way too , and you already have , I ’ m sure , ” Trump said .
“ But between drug abuse , and , I mean , they say suicide — a lot of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , there ’ s no great win one way or the other.
” While many would disagree with Trump ’ s insinuation that tens of thousands of lives are worth prematurely pretending the worst of the coronavirus is in the rearview mirror , Trump has self-interested motives for downplaying the new models : He faces a tough reelection fight , and the economic message he planned to make a centerpiece of his campaign has been suddenly flipped into a conversation about the possibility of 20 percent unemployment and massive quarterly declines in GDP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grim public health reality , the White House has instead reportedly relied on a rosier model prepared by controversial White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett that implausibly shows coronavirus deaths plunging to zero by mid-May .
It ’ s difficult to tell exactly what the White House is basing its Covid-19 policies on at the moment , in part because Trump is preventing House Democrats from asking government public health experts what ’ s going on .
During another part of his Q & A with reporters on Tuesday , he said that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s top infectious disease expert , Dr. Anthony Fauci of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases , from testifying to the House of Representatives because “ the House is a setup.
” ( Fauci will testify next week before the Republican-controlled Senate . )
“ The House is a bunch of Trump haters , ” Trump added .
“ They , frankly , want our situation to be unsuccessful , which means death.
” He went on to suggest that the US coronavirus response is the envy of the world .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ watching us , because we ’ re leading the world , ” Trump said — ignoring that the nearly 70,000 coronavirus deaths the US has experienced to date are well over twice the number endured by the No .
2 country , Italy , which has had just over 29,000 .
Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

As President Trump pushes for businesses to reopen — even though the US coronavirus outbreak is not under control — his response to two new models indicating that cases and deaths will increase in the coming weeks is to mischaracterize them.
The models are grim, with one projecting 135,000 Americans will die by early August, and the other estimating the US will see 3,000 daily deaths by June 1. Grilled about them on Tuesday by reporters ahead of his departure for a trip to Arizona, Trump dismissed them, falsely claiming they are based on “no mitigation,” as in, if we did nothing.
“We’re doing a lot of mitigation,” Trump said. “And, frankly, when the people report back [to work], they’re gonna be social distancing, and they’re gonna be washing their hands, and they’re gonna be doing the things that you’re supposed to do ... but that report is a no-mitigation report, and we are mitigating.”
Trump lies and says models that show US coronavirus deaths increasing in coming weeks are based on "no mitigation," which is not the case. They are based on the relaxation of mitigation that he has been championing. pic.twitter.com/ijqmzGya73 — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 5, 2020
But the fact is, the US is doing less mitigation than it was a few weeks ago. States are beginning to reopen nonessential businesses, and customers are beginning to patronize them.
And the two new models — one based on government data put together by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and another by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington (IHME) — take this into account. Both feature projections based on the relaxation of mitigation that Trump has championed by urging state governments to take steps to reopen businesses, even as none of them has met the White House coronavirus task force’s gating criteria for doing so.
For instance, as the New York Times reports, the IHME’s new model, which estimates that the coronavirus will claim nearly 135,000 lives in the US by early August, states that its upward revision is based on “rising mobility in most US states as well as the easing of social distancing measures expected in 31 states by May 11, indicating that growing contacts among people will promote transmission of the coronavirus.” (The FEMA document shows that the daily US death toll will reach 3,000 by June 1, a near doubling of the roughly 1,500 lives being claimed per day by the coronavirus right now.)
Trump’s comments indicate that he thinks workers being diligent about washing their hands and trying to keep distance from other people will be sufficient to slow the spread of the virus, but experts say that’s not the case. Stay-at-home orders and the shutdown of most businesses haven’t so far been sufficient to bend the trajectory of new cases down, they’ve merely gotten the country to a relative plateau in new cases and deaths. This suggests the number of new cases and deaths will likely get worse as things reopen.
It is for these reasons that public health experts think it’s premature to relax stay-at-home orders. But later during his comments outside the White House on Tuesday, Trump indicated he thinks there’s no choice but to try to get the economy going again.
Asked by a reporter if he’s concerned that deaths are projected to increase because states are relaxing social distancing guidelines too early, Trump responded that he isn’t because “the fact that we’re letting people go and go to their jobs — they have to do it.”
“You know, if they held people any longer with the shutdowns, you’re going to lose people that way too, and you already have, I’m sure,” Trump said. “But between drug abuse, and, I mean, they say suicide — a lot of different things. Just so you know, there’s no great win one way or the other.”
REPORTER: Are you concerned that deaths are projected to rise b/c states are relaxing guidelines too early?
TRUMP: No ... the fact that we're letting people go & go to their jobs -- they have to do it ... between drug abuse, suicide -- there's no great win one way or the other pic.twitter.com/dPO92VNNvY — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 5, 2020
While many would disagree with Trump’s insinuation that tens of thousands of lives are worth prematurely pretending the worst of the coronavirus is in the rearview mirror, Trump has self-interested motives for downplaying the new models: He faces a tough reelection fight, and the economic message he planned to make a centerpiece of his campaign has been suddenly flipped into a conversation about the possibility of 20 percent unemployment and massive quarterly declines in GDP.
So instead of engaging with the grim public health reality, the White House has instead reportedly relied on a rosier model prepared by controversial White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett that implausibly shows coronavirus deaths plunging to zero by mid-May.
It’s difficult to tell exactly what the White House is basing its Covid-19 policies on at the moment, in part because Trump is preventing House Democrats from asking government public health experts what’s going on. During another part of his Q&A with reporters on Tuesday, he said that he’s blocking the government’s top infectious disease expert, Dr. Anthony Fauci of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, from testifying to the House of Representatives because “the House is a setup.” (Fauci will testify next week before the Republican-controlled Senate.)
“The House is a bunch of Trump haters,” Trump added. “They, frankly, want our situation to be unsuccessful, which means death.”
REPORTER: Why won't you let Fauci testify before the House?
TRUMP: "Because the House is a set up. The House is a bunch of Trump haters ... they, frankly, want our situation to be unsuccessful, which means death." pic.twitter.com/G3G5OoV5IV — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 5, 2020
He went on to suggest that the US coronavirus response is the envy of the world.
“The whole world is excited, watching us, because we’re leading the world,” Trump said — ignoring that the nearly 70,000 coronavirus deaths the US has experienced to date are well over twice the number endured by the No. 2 country, Italy, which has had just over 29,000.


vox--2020-05-05--What Google searches tell us about our coronavirus thoughts and fears

Life during the coronavirus pandemic is full of questions .
And for many of those questions , people are turning to the internet and , by extension , to Google .
Google is by far the world ’ s dominant search engine , fielding about 90 percent of the world ’ s online queries .
So Google has more insight into our internet searches than any other company .
Fortunately for the data nerds among us , the company makes those search trends readily available with a website called Google Trends .
This tool lets people compare how popular one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another , offering insight into what people are curious about .
That ’ s particularly helpful with the coronavirus , which has consistently dominated search queries in the past few months — even beyond more quotidian standbys like weather , music , and video .
We spoke with Simon Rogers , data editor at Google , who has been putting out a fascinating daily newsletter and coronavirus page from Google Trends data about different trending searches and what they might mean .
This interview has been edited for clarity and brevity .
For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can you explain what Google Trends is ?
Google Trends is basically a public tool that anybody can use .
It takes a sample of all search — there are billions of searches every day , so it couldn ’ t possibly measure every one — and basically all of those searches go through this process where we try and work out what they ’ re really about , which topics they ’ re about .
And then what we do is try and make that data easier for people to access .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that ’ ll be where we would look at the top questions that somebody will be asking about the virus .
Google Trends is , I would say , the world ’ s largest free-access , journalistic data set .
And it ’ s ever-changing , and every day it gives you a sense of what people really care about .
What advantage does Google Trends have over other datasets ?
There ’ s ubiquity in search .
It takes you beyond that echo chamber of social media .
Because you ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way , you ’ re being honest .
You ’ re never as honest as you are with your search engine .
You get a sense of what people genuinely care about and genuinely want to know — and not just how they ’ re presenting themselves to the rest of the world .
And it ’ s immediate .
As soon as something happens , it shows up in search .
“ You ’ re never as honest as you are with your search engine ” I ’ ve been paying attention @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus .
That ’ s because , as we ’ re spending more time at home and computers mediate our lives with the outside world even more , it seems like we ’ re getting a better window into what people ’ s thoughts and questions and fears are during the pandemic .
Do you think that ’ s the case ?
I think partly it ’ s because suddenly you ’ ve got this giant shared experience , something we ’ re all going through , and it ’ s very easy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ What ’ s happened to you isn ’ t happening to anybody else .
But you can get a real sense of how that ’ s reflected in the way that we search .
Looking at the searches , right now , I think they almost split into two different categories .
On one side , there are people searching for the big issues around the virus : “ Is there a vaccine yet ?
” or “ Why does one drug work ?
” or “ What are the symptoms ?
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And then the other side is the fallout from the virus , which are searches around things like loneliness and big emotional issues .
And then there are also things like : “ How do I cut my own hair ?
” or “ How do I bake bread ?
” or “ How do I keep the kids entertained ?
” — things we ’ re all going through .
Those latter trends have been some of the most interesting to me .
I saw the bread , obviously , banana bread @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way too many bananas and have to figure out how to deal with it — how to cut your own hair .
One of the things that really blew me away was that all of a sudden everyone and their mother was Googling “ how to make coffee ” and must have never had to figure that out before .
What do you make of that ?
It ’ s funny , isn ’ t it ?
It ’ s all those things that we do during the day , not at home @ @ @ @ @ @ @ partly because people want to expand their knowledge of something .
So probably people know how to make instant coffee by now , right ?
But people will search for how to make Dalgona coffee , which is this kind of whipped thing with sugar in it that my daughter ’ s been doing tons of in the last five weeks .
It ’ s things like that which are out of the ordinary , so they ’ re not necessarily things you would do if you didn ’ t have time at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of how to just change things up a little bit .
What are some of the more surprising searches you ’ ve seen trending ?
The fact that there were things I ’ ve been thinking of personally — to see them show up in search is always interesting .
Like we have a 3D printer , and I was thinking , I wonder if other people search for how to 3D print face masks to donate to hospitals , which is a very specific thing .
Searches for 3D printing are higher @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there ’ s some things which are kind of reassuring , like searches for how to help , food donation , helping the community , how to volunteer — all of those things are higher than ever before .
It ’ s good to think that we ’ re thinking of others at this moment .
But there ’ s big spikes in searches around very specific DIY that goes across both search data and YouTube data .
And there ’ s a lot of big spikes in search for things that are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t even think about , like homemade eyebrow wax , that makes sense but also scares me a little bit .
“ There ’ s things that would have seemed weird like six weeks ago that don ’ t seem weird now ” I could use some homemade eyebrow wax right about now .
Ha !
Then , there ’ s more the how-to thing , like how to make a face mask at home or how to ripen avocados , how to divide fractions .
We saw searches for “ shredded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Oh , this is people talking about weightlifting or bodybuilding , ” and actually it ’ s people searching for shredded chicken .
What about the weirdest search ?
There ’ s things that would have seemed weird like six weeks ago that don ’ t seem weird now .
“ Drive-by birthday party ” spiked 5,000 percent , and that ’ s not something I or anybody had ever heard of before six weeks ago .
And if you ’ d asked me this in March , I ’ d say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but now it just feels normal .
It ’ s the new normal .
What about concerning Google searches ?
For example , this morning I saw that one of the highest-trending US coronavirus questions was , “ Who created coronavirus ?
” which is this conspiracy theory that keeps popping up and has no basis in fact .
There are things that are concerning for society like the spike in searches for “ loneliness , ” people searching for “ having trouble sleeping , ” “ depression.
” All of those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I worry for people that don ’ t have people with them or are feeling it .
Then the other misinformation thing is really interesting , because normally around any political thing , you always see spikes and searches where people are trying to find out if a misinfo story is true .
But now , I do get the sense that the highest spikes are things around searches for reliable information , like people searching for cdc.gov or wherever are really high at the moment .
So I wonder whether that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ things we know are true .
Occasionally , misinfo things do show up .
But if you have politicians saying , “ Coronavirus was created somewhere , ” then people are going to search for that .
And that ’ s just a side effect of where we are right now .
I think the fact that people are looking for it is actually a good thing because it means we want to know if it ’ s true or not .
They ’ re not necessarily just going to accept it .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ Coronavirus was created somewhere , ’ then people are going to search for that ” Is there any real-world stuff that you could do with Google Trends , especially as it relates to public health .
Like , could you see where there are new coronavirus hot spots or something like that ?
The country-level datasets , which we update every day , shows the top 100 places searching for coronavirus as well as the top related queries , which are what people type in when they search for the virus .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ things that are popping up in search and then change their official information to reflect that .
I think we ’ re really at the beginning of how useful this is .
One of the things we ’ ve been thinking about are these kind of patterns of search around the virus .
What you see is when people don ’ t really have many cases , lots of searches are very informational like , “ What is coronavirus ?
” And then when cases start happening then there are things like , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
” And then it gets to more sophisticated questions when you ’ re living in lockdown .
Like in New York , for instance , you ’ ll see questions around things like , “ How long does coronavirus live on surfaces ?
” or “ When ’ s the lockdown going to end ?
” or “ How do I get my stimulus check ?
” So you can really see how things change over time .
I think you could probably build a really interesting model around that .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around people .
Are there any regional or country-specific differences in coronavirus that have stuck out to you ?
There are some differences .
For instance , in France right now they have these zones of infection , so people search for the “ red zone , ” and before that was people searching for a pass to leave Paris and things like that .
You see these kinds of country differences , but really the way that the search evolves is common across countries .
So if you were to look at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seven weeks ago , they are very similar to searches we ’ re seeing in New York now .
It ’ s almost like the big questions are common across all of us .
We ’ re all trying to find the same things .
It comes out of the uncertainty of knowing there isn ’ t a cure , there isn ’ t a vaccine right now .
That uncertainty leads to a lot of similar questions in different places .
What don ’ t we see in Google Trends data ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ I don ’ t know who somebody is .
The data is anonymized so you don ’ t get individual data .
So , I can ’ t tell you how different age groups search or anything like that .
Also , unless you ’ re extrapolating something from the data , what you can tell is what people care about , but you can ’ t tell what their opinions are about it .
What should people not be Googling ?
I wouldn ’ t tell anybody not to Google anything , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thing .
I think people need to think about information with the same care they think about any aspect of their lives .
If you ’ re consuming information , you want it to be reliable .
Just thinking of information as this valuable resource that matters is really important .
I think I ’ d rather have people Googling everything , searching for everything , rather than accepting something without searching for it .
I ’ d much rather you looked up stuff yourself than just believe things on face value , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

Life during the coronavirus pandemic is full of questions.
And for many of those questions, people are turning to the internet and, by extension, to Google. Google is by far the world’s dominant search engine, fielding about 90 percent of the world’s online queries. So Google has more insight into our internet searches than any other company.
Fortunately for the data nerds among us, the company makes those search trends readily available with a website called Google Trends. This tool lets people compare how popular one search is over time or compared with another, offering insight into what people are curious about. That’s particularly helpful with the coronavirus, which has consistently dominated search queries in the past few months — even beyond more quotidian standbys like weather, music, and video.
We spoke with Simon Rogers, data editor at Google, who has been putting out a fascinating daily newsletter and coronavirus page from Google Trends data about different trending searches and what they might mean.
This interview has been edited for clarity and brevity.
Rani Molla
For those who aren’t familiar, can you explain what Google Trends is?
Simon Rogers
Google Trends is basically a public tool that anybody can use. It takes a sample of all search — there are billions of searches every day, so it couldn’t possibly measure every one — and basically all of those searches go through this process where we try and work out what they’re really about, which topics they’re about. And then what we do is try and make that data easier for people to access.
So around something like coronavirus, say, that’ll be where we would look at the top questions that somebody will be asking about the virus. Google Trends is, I would say, the world’s largest free-access, journalistic data set. And it’s ever-changing, and every day it gives you a sense of what people really care about.
Rani Molla
What advantage does Google Trends have over other datasets?
Simon Rogers
There’s ubiquity in search. It takes you beyond that echo chamber of social media. Because you’re not presenting yourself in a certain way, you’re being honest. You’re never as honest as you are with your search engine. You get a sense of what people genuinely care about and genuinely want to know — and not just how they’re presenting themselves to the rest of the world. And it’s immediate. As soon as something happens, it shows up in search.
“You’re never as honest as you are with your search engine”
Rani Molla
I’ve been paying attention to Google Trends a lot more during coronavirus. That’s because, as we’re spending more time at home and computers mediate our lives with the outside world even more, it seems like we’re getting a better window into what people’s thoughts and questions and fears are during the pandemic. Do you think that’s the case?
Simon Rogers
I think partly it’s because suddenly you’ve got this giant shared experience, something we’re all going through, and it’s very easy in that environment to feel isolated. What’s happened to you isn’t happening to anybody else. But you can get a real sense of how that’s reflected in the way that we search. Looking at the searches, right now, I think they almost split into two different categories.
On one side, there are people searching for the big issues around the virus: “Is there a vaccine yet?” or “Why does one drug work?” or “What are the symptoms?” — those kinds of big questions. And then the other side is the fallout from the virus, which are searches around things like loneliness and big emotional issues. And then there are also things like: “How do I cut my own hair?” or “How do I bake bread?” or “How do I keep the kids entertained?” — things we’re all going through.
Rani Molla
Those latter trends have been some of the most interesting to me. I saw the bread, obviously, banana bread — I figure people are just buying way too many bananas and have to figure out how to deal with it — how to cut your own hair. One of the things that really blew me away was that all of a sudden everyone and their mother was Googling “how to make coffee” and must have never had to figure that out before. What do you make of that?
Simon Rogers
It’s funny, isn’t it? It’s all those things that we do during the day, not at home often. I think it’s partly because people want to expand their knowledge of something. So probably people know how to make instant coffee by now, right? But people will search for how to make Dalgona coffee, which is this kind of whipped thing with sugar in it that my daughter’s been doing tons of in the last five weeks. It’s things like that which are out of the ordinary, so they’re not necessarily things you would do if you didn’t have time at home and you weren’t thinking of how to just change things up a little bit.
Rani Molla
What are some of the more surprising searches you’ve seen trending?
Simon Rogers
The fact that there were things I’ve been thinking of personally — to see them show up in search is always interesting. Like we have a 3D printer, and I was thinking, I wonder if other people search for how to 3D print face masks to donate to hospitals, which is a very specific thing. Searches for 3D printing are higher than ever before in history. And there’s some things which are kind of reassuring, like searches for how to help, food donation, helping the community, how to volunteer — all of those things are higher than ever before.
It’s good to think that we’re thinking of others at this moment. But there’s big spikes in searches around very specific DIY that goes across both search data and YouTube data. And there’s a lot of big spikes in search for things that are homemade, weird stuff that I wouldn’t even think about, like homemade eyebrow wax, that makes sense but also scares me a little bit.
“There’s things that would have seemed weird like six weeks ago that don’t seem weird now”
Rani Molla
I could use some homemade eyebrow wax right about now.
Simon Rogers
Ha! Then, there’s more the how-to thing, like how to make a face mask at home or how to ripen avocados, how to divide fractions. We saw searches for “shredded” were spiking and we thought, “Oh, this is people talking about weightlifting or bodybuilding,” and actually it’s people searching for shredded chicken.
Rani Molla
What about the weirdest search?
Simon Rogers
There’s things that would have seemed weird like six weeks ago that don’t seem weird now. “Drive-by birthday party” spiked 5,000 percent, and that’s not something I or anybody had ever heard of before six weeks ago. And if you’d asked me this in March, I’d say well, this is a weird thing, but now it just feels normal.
Rani Molla
It’s the new normal. What about concerning Google searches? For example, this morning I saw that one of the highest-trending US coronavirus questions was, “Who created coronavirus?” which is this conspiracy theory that keeps popping up and has no basis in fact.
Simon Rogers
There are things that are concerning for society like the spike in searches for “loneliness,” people searching for “having trouble sleeping,” “depression.” All of those things are concerning to me, and I worry for people that don’t have people with them or are feeling it. Then the other misinformation thing is really interesting, because normally around any political thing, you always see spikes and searches where people are trying to find out if a misinfo story is true.
But now, I do get the sense that the highest spikes are things around searches for reliable information, like people searching for cdc.gov or wherever are really high at the moment. So I wonder whether that’s because we’re looking for things we know are true. Occasionally, misinfo things do show up. But if you have politicians saying, “Coronavirus was created somewhere,” then people are going to search for that. And that’s just a side effect of where we are right now. I think the fact that people are looking for it is actually a good thing because it means we want to know if it’s true or not. They’re not necessarily just going to accept it.
“If you have politicians saying, ‘Coronavirus was created somewhere,’ then people are going to search for that”
Rani Molla
Is there any real-world stuff that you could do with Google Trends, especially as it relates to public health. Like, could you see where there are new coronavirus hot spots or something like that?
Simon Rogers
The country-level datasets, which we update every day, shows the top 100 places searching for coronavirus as well as the top related queries, which are what people type in when they search for the virus. Governments have noticed different stages for different things that are popping up in search and then change their official information to reflect that. I think we’re really at the beginning of how useful this is.
One of the things we’ve been thinking about are these kind of patterns of search around the virus. What you see is when people don’t really have many cases, lots of searches are very informational like, “What is coronavirus?” And then when cases start happening then there are things like, “What are the symptoms of coronavirus?” And then it gets to more sophisticated questions when you’re living in lockdown.
Like in New York, for instance, you’ll see questions around things like, “How long does coronavirus live on surfaces?” or “When’s the lockdown going to end?” or “How do I get my stimulus check?” So you can really see how things change over time. I think you could probably build a really interesting model around that. This is a real-time reaction to the situation around people.
Rani Molla
Are there any regional or country-specific differences in coronavirus that have stuck out to you?
Simon Rogers
There are some differences. For instance, in France right now they have these zones of infection, so people search for the “red zone,” and before that was people searching for a pass to leave Paris and things like that. You see these kinds of country differences, but really the way that the search evolves is common across countries.
So if you were to look at the searches in, say, Milan seven weeks ago, they are very similar to searches we’re seeing in New York now. It’s almost like the big questions are common across all of us. We’re all trying to find the same things. It comes out of the uncertainty of knowing there isn’t a cure, there isn’t a vaccine right now. That uncertainty leads to a lot of similar questions in different places.
Rani Molla
What don’t we see in Google Trends data?
Simon Rogers
We can’t tell demographics. I don’t know who somebody is. The data is anonymized so you don’t get individual data. So, I can’t tell you how different age groups search or anything like that. Also, unless you’re extrapolating something from the data, what you can tell is what people care about, but you can’t tell what their opinions are about it.
Rani Molla
What should people not be Googling?
Simon Rogers
I wouldn’t tell anybody not to Google anything, because that’s such a personal thing. I think people need to think about information with the same care they think about any aspect of their lives. If you’re consuming information, you want it to be reliable. Just thinking of information as this valuable resource that matters is really important.
I think I’d rather have people Googling everything, searching for everything, rather than accepting something without searching for it. I’d much rather you looked up stuff yourself than just believe things on face value, wherever they’re coming from.


vox--2020-05-05--In the exquisite drama South Mountain, a woman’s broken dreams make space for new ones

Every week , new original films debut on Netflix , Hulu , and other digital services , often films with modest budgets and limited fanfare .
Cinemastream is Vox ’ s series highlighting the most notable of these premieres , in an ongoing effort to keep interesting and easily accessible new films on your radar .
The premise : South Mountain is the wise , sometimes bitter , sometimes overwhelmingly emotional tale of a woman learning to fall out of love .
What it ’ s about : Easily one of my favorite films that I saw at a film @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the tale of Lila ( Talia Balsam ) , an art teacher who lives in the Catskills with her husband Edgar ( Scott Cohen ) and their teenage children .
Life is tranquil there .
It feels like the kind of paradise you hope you ’ ll attain after years of hard work and child-rearing : not extravagant , but luxurious in its domesticity .
But Edgar is harboring a secret , something we realize early on when he sneaks away from a family gathering to watch over FaceTime as a younger woman @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Lila and Edgar ’ s marriage is unraveling , in a manner that ’ s both angry and so matter-of-fact that it seems evident they both knew this would happen eventually .
Edgar leaves .
And Lila , faced with a new sense of freedom , is forced to reckon with both what she believes about herself and how she might want to live now .
South Mountain is a bit like a coming-of-age film for middle age .
Each scene is exquisitely simple but vibrantly alive ; director and writer Hilary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nothing is cleanly resolved but a future is still possible .
Lila ’ s moments of realization about her life so far , her identity , and what she values come in between the basic moments of living — drinking tea , thinking about things she needs to do around the house , figuring out where to hold on and where to let go .
As Lila ’ s sense of self shifts , almost imperceptibly , Balsam ’ s performance lets us in on her moods , her emotions , her rediscovery @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , moments of delicious revenge .
Nothing in South Mountain seems contrived or forced .
It ’ s a lived-in movie , mostly filmed in one location .
The strictures of a small budget work in South Mountain ’ s favor ; instead of being slick and shiny , it lets us feel like we ’ re right there in the house , and thus makes Lila ’ s emotions feel immediate — her anger , her sadness , her exhilaration .
It ’ s as if you ’ re watching live theater @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , too .
None of us escapes an occasional forced confrontation with what we thought was true about the world , even if the details are different for everyone .
We all are faced with a mirror that reveals our true selves , once in a while .
South Mountain suggests that the moments that break us can also give us the space and excuse to grow and re-mold ourselves in new ways .
There ’ s joy in those broken spaces .
Critical reception : South Mountain earned positive reviews from critics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ At Indiewire , Eric Kohn writes that “ South Mountain begs to be met on its own terms , and on that level , hits every relevant mark .
Its final image , of the yawning mountain landscape , provides a cogent reminder that even the bleakest tales of heartbreak and loneliness are dwarfed by nature ’ s incessant grandeur.
” How to watch it : South Mountain is available on digital on-demand services such as iTunes ; see the film ’ s website for a full list .
Every day at Vox @ @ @ @ @ @ @ important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

Every week, new original films debut on Netflix, Hulu, and other digital services, often films with modest budgets and limited fanfare. Cinemastream is Vox’s series highlighting the most notable of these premieres, in an ongoing effort to keep interesting and easily accessible new films on your radar.
South Mountain
The premise: South Mountain is the wise, sometimes bitter, sometimes overwhelmingly emotional tale of a woman learning to fall out of love.
Rating: 4 out of 5 vox-mark vox-mark vox-mark vox-mark vox-mark
What it’s about: Easily one of my favorite films that I saw at a film festival in 2019, South Mountain is the tale of Lila (Talia Balsam), an art teacher who lives in the Catskills with her husband Edgar (Scott Cohen) and their teenage children. Life is tranquil there. It feels like the kind of paradise you hope you’ll attain after years of hard work and child-rearing: not extravagant, but luxurious in its domesticity.
But Edgar is harboring a secret, something we realize early on when he sneaks away from a family gathering to watch over FaceTime as a younger woman gives birth to his child. Soon, Lila and Edgar’s marriage is unraveling, in a manner that’s both angry and so matter-of-fact that it seems evident they both knew this would happen eventually.
Edgar leaves. And Lila, faced with a new sense of freedom, is forced to reckon with both what she believes about herself and how she might want to live now.
South Mountain is a bit like a coming-of-age film for middle age. Each scene is exquisitely simple but vibrantly alive; director and writer Hilary Brougher has crafted a world in which nothing is cleanly resolved but a future is still possible. Lila’s moments of realization about her life so far, her identity, and what she values come in between the basic moments of living — drinking tea, thinking about things she needs to do around the house, figuring out where to hold on and where to let go. As Lila’s sense of self shifts, almost imperceptibly, Balsam’s performance lets us in on her moods, her emotions, her rediscovery of what she wants and, even, moments of delicious revenge.
Nothing in South Mountain seems contrived or forced. It’s a lived-in movie, mostly filmed in one location. The strictures of a small budget work in South Mountain’s favor; instead of being slick and shiny, it lets us feel like we’re right there in the house, and thus makes Lila’s emotions feel immediate — her anger, her sadness, her exhilaration. It’s as if you’re watching live theater.
South Mountain is a wise movie, too. None of us escapes an occasional forced confrontation with what we thought was true about the world, even if the details are different for everyone. We all are faced with a mirror that reveals our true selves, once in a while. South Mountain suggests that the moments that break us can also give us the space and excuse to grow and re-mold ourselves in new ways. There’s joy in those broken spaces.
Critical reception: South Mountain earned positive reviews from critics following its festival run in 2019. At Indiewire, Eric Kohn writes that “South Mountain begs to be met on its own terms, and on that level, hits every relevant mark. Its final image, of the yawning mountain landscape, provides a cogent reminder that even the bleakest tales of heartbreak and loneliness are dwarfed by nature’s incessant grandeur.”
How to watch it: South Mountain is available on digital on-demand services such as iTunes; see the film’s website for a full list.


vox--2020-05-05--The Good Fight is the only TV show that stares our absurd reality in the face

The Good Fight ’ s opening credits are worth watching over and over again .
As the jaunty , stringy instrumental theme plays , elegant symbols of wealth , power , and the profession of law — orchids in a vase , leather-bound books , a gavel , liquor in a decanter , an Hermès Birkin handbag — explode , one by one , against a slick black background .
Each one is destroyed in slow motion , shards of glass or leather or laptop screen flying in all directions .
Very expensive handbags and conference call telephones blow up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allure in destruction .
But in a beautifully round way , the explosions of the show ’ s opening credits also reflect its ethos and spirit : The Good Fight is about the idea of power and luxury draped around chaos and destruction .
Specifically , it ’ s about ace lawyer and statement necklace advocate Diane Lockhart ( Christine Baranski ) , a vestige of stability and dignity on The Good Fight ’ s predecessor The Good Wife , losing her retirement fund and her career fortune — all those glamorous lawyer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back to practicing law .
Diane ’ s career shift unfurls into something bigger and brasher , as she and her fellow fictional associates live in a world that very closely mirrors our reality .
In The Good Fight ’ s pocket universe , Donald Trump won the 2016 election and there ’ s an episode devoted to the infamous rumored “ pee tape.
” China ’ s censorship is just as stifling , Roy Cohn ’ s moral-free protégé is bullying attorneys , and a sexual harassment scandal concerning a Les Moonves-like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( Moonves is the former head of CBS , the network behind The Good Fight and The Good Wife ) .
These are just a few of the show ’ s many real-world parallels .
The Good Fight — which debuted on CBS All Access in February 2017 , shortly after Trump took office , and recently kicked off its fourth season — is the only show I ’ ve seen that has effectively captured what many Americans have felt throughout the past few years : that the world and the news cycle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ frequently moot , and living through it has been a relentlessly exhausting exercise .
And instead of pushing an optimistic , fairy tale message of resilience or attempting to be even remotely inspiring , The Good Fight simply shrugs , and says there ’ s a reason its hero resorted to microdosing psychedelics in season two .
The Good Fight confronts the exhausting times we ’ re living in The Good Fight is a spinoff of The Good Wife , which aired for seven seasons on CBS from 2009 to 2016 .
When @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Michelle King riffed on the real-life Eliot Spitzer prostitution scandal to produce what appeared to be procedural courtroom drama sprinkled with coy references to politicians and current events .
But throughout The Good Wife ’ s run , the show shrugged off its early premise of an embarrassed political spouse making her way back into society and explored much bigger , weightier topics .
The show considered how justice often isn ’ t about right or wrong good or evil , but the result of Machiavellian legal maneuvering ; mused about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the NSA , search engines , and Facebook ; owned the way its flawed hero benefited from an immense amount privilege ; and , among other things , detailed the hardship of trying to live life with two hilariously annoying children .
The Kings then brought that same story-smuggling spirit to The Good Fight , but with much less restraint , thanks in large part to it airing on CBS ’ s All Access streaming service instead of on broadcast TV .
The storytelling is less surgical than that of its predecessor , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( Baranski says the f-word a lot ) and ambitious .
That ’ s doubly true in how cognizant it is of race and economic inequality , much more than The Good Wife was at this point in its run — for example , the law firm that hires Diane on The Good Fight is black-owned and predominantly focuses on working-class cases .
As a Good Wife devotee , I ’ ve found it rewarding to watch Diane ’ s evolution on The Good Wife , as her reckoning with privilege , politics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But you don ’ t need to have seen 150-plus episodes of The Good Wife to grasp what ’ s going on in the new story .
( In these times , you could certainly make a project out of it , but you could also just check out CBS ’ s handy guide for newcomers . )
The Kings are good storytellers and do not leave their audience flailing ; The Good Fight ’ s major storyline , Diane ’ s adjustment to working again after losing all her money in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , The Good Fight begins a year after the events of The Good Wife and is set in the same universe .
Diane is a liberal , wealthy lawyer , and the show consistently shows her frustrations with the politics and policies of the Trump administration .
Despite a disclaimer that all representations on the show are fictional , Trump is ultimately The Good Fight ’ s big bad , always looming in the distance like a video game boss .
Every action Diane takes , every win she scores , every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even in moments when she isn ’ t directly thinking about Trump — they all come back to her disgust for the president , and she sees him as the catalyst for all the problems in her life , including her professional restart and her fraying marriage .
She ’ s stuck in a cycle of unabated anger and relentless helplessness .
At her wits ’ end , Diane does what any person in her situation would do and begins experimenting with psilocybin during The Good Fight ’ s second season .
While @ @ @ @ @ @ @ questioned , but the show argues that her drug-influenced conduct is just as surreal as the administration she hates so much .
And yes , I ’ m fully aware of the nonsense setup that is Christine Baranski microdosing psychedelic mushrooms on a prestige legal drama .
But I swear it ’ s real .
The Good Fight began its fourth season , which premiered April 8 , by fiddling around with the comic book element of an alternate reality .
In its hilariously taut premiere , Diane wakes up in a world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a scenario that should be a paradise for her .
But she slowly starts to realize that other events in this timeline mean that Harvey Weinstein was never punished , that the Clinton administration has cured cancer but has its own scandals , that her job requires her to curry favor with Supreme Court Justice Elizabeth Warren , and that the multiple famous men accused of masturbating into potted plants are still on the loose .
Since many of the bad people in this alt-timeline are Democrats , Diane ’ s job leads @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her disgust for their actions .
In that moment , the show turns its own sardonic nature and political posturing onto itself .
Reality is restored at the end of the episode , and life continues ( with Trump as president ) for Diane and the rest of her cohort as they adjust to life having been acquired by a bigger , richer firm .
But the sly thing about Diane ’ s alternate-reality scenario is that a lot of the awful stuff that happened in it actually happened in real life to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Regardless of our political affiliation , it wasn ’ t a figment of deep , dark satire .
And somehow , we ’ re still chugging along , dealing with another crisis ( a Good Fight riff on the coronavirus can ’ t be far off ) .
But instead of giving us an assured and righteous pledge about brighter days ahead and a future worth fighting for , The Good Fight seems to recognize that at this point , we should maybe just get credit for not hitting Diane ’ s magic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , feels like its own kind of relief .
The Good Fight is streaming on CBS All Access , with new episodes of season four coming out on Wednesdays .
One Good Thing is Vox ’ s recommendations feature .
In each edition , find one more thing from the world of culture that we highly recommend .
Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

One Good Thing is Vox’s recommendations feature. In each edition, find one more thing from the world of culture that we highly recommend.
The Good Fight’s opening credits are worth watching over and over again. As the jaunty, stringy instrumental theme plays, elegant symbols of wealth, power, and the profession of law — orchids in a vase, leather-bound books, a gavel, liquor in a decanter, an Hermès Birkin handbag — explode, one by one, against a slick black background. Each one is destroyed in slow motion, shards of glass or leather or laptop screen flying in all directions.
Very expensive handbags and conference call telephones blow up. And there’s a dark allure in destruction. But in a beautifully round way, the explosions of the show’s opening credits also reflect its ethos and spirit: The Good Fight is about the idea of power and luxury draped around chaos and destruction.
Specifically, it’s about ace lawyer and statement necklace advocate Diane Lockhart (Christine Baranski), a vestige of stability and dignity on The Good Fight’s predecessor The Good Wife, losing her retirement fund and her career fortune — all those glamorous lawyer accessories included — and having to go back to practicing law.
Diane’s career shift unfurls into something bigger and brasher, as she and her fellow fictional associates live in a world that very closely mirrors our reality.
In The Good Fight’s pocket universe, Donald Trump won the 2016 election and there’s an episode devoted to the infamous rumored “pee tape.” China’s censorship is just as stifling, Roy Cohn’s moral-free protégé is bullying attorneys, and a sexual harassment scandal concerning a Les Moonves-like figure hangs over Diane’s firm (Moonves is the former head of CBS, the network behind The Good Fight and The Good Wife). These are just a few of the show’s many real-world parallels.
The Good Fight — which debuted on CBS All Access in February 2017, shortly after Trump took office, and recently kicked off its fourth season — is the only show I’ve seen that has effectively captured what many Americans have felt throughout the past few years: that the world and the news cycle have become so unhinged that satire is frequently moot, and living through it has been a relentlessly exhausting exercise.
And instead of pushing an optimistic, fairy tale message of resilience or attempting to be even remotely inspiring, The Good Fight simply shrugs, and says there’s a reason its hero resorted to microdosing psychedelics in season two.
The Good Fight confronts the exhausting times we’re living in
The Good Fight is a spinoff of The Good Wife, which aired for seven seasons on CBS from 2009 to 2016. When creating The Good Wife, showrunners Robert and Michelle King riffed on the real-life Eliot Spitzer prostitution scandal to produce what appeared to be procedural courtroom drama sprinkled with coy references to politicians and current events.
But throughout The Good Wife’s run, the show shrugged off its early premise of an embarrassed political spouse making her way back into society and explored much bigger, weightier topics. The show considered how justice often isn’t about right or wrong good or evil, but the result of Machiavellian legal maneuvering; mused about the death of privacy in America due to the NSA, search engines, and Facebook; owned the way its flawed hero benefited from an immense amount privilege; and, among other things, detailed the hardship of trying to live life with two hilariously annoying children.
The Kings then brought that same story-smuggling spirit to The Good Fight, but with much less restraint, thanks in large part to it airing on CBS’s All Access streaming service instead of on broadcast TV. The storytelling is less surgical than that of its predecessor, but at the same time more bombastic (Baranski says the f-word a lot) and ambitious. That’s doubly true in how cognizant it is of race and economic inequality, much more than The Good Wife was at this point in its run — for example, the law firm that hires Diane on The Good Fight is black-owned and predominantly focuses on working-class cases.
As a Good Wife devotee, I’ve found it rewarding to watch Diane’s evolution on The Good Wife, as her reckoning with privilege, politics, power, and race continues. But you don’t need to have seen 150-plus episodes of The Good Wife to grasp what’s going on in the new story. (In these times, you could certainly make a project out of it, but you could also just check out CBS’s handy guide for newcomers.) The Kings are good storytellers and do not leave their audience flailing; The Good Fight’s major storyline, Diane’s adjustment to working again after losing all her money in a Ponzi scheme, feels self-contained.
That said, The Good Fight begins a year after the events of The Good Wife and is set in the same universe.
Diane is a liberal, wealthy lawyer, and the show consistently shows her frustrations with the politics and policies of the Trump administration. Despite a disclaimer that all representations on the show are fictional, Trump is ultimately The Good Fight’s big bad, always looming in the distance like a video game boss. Every action Diane takes, every win she scores, every thought that goes through her mind, even in moments when she isn’t directly thinking about Trump — they all come back to her disgust for the president, and she sees him as the catalyst for all the problems in her life, including her professional restart and her fraying marriage.
She’s stuck in a cycle of unabated anger and relentless helplessness.
At her wits’ end, Diane does what any person in her situation would do and begins experimenting with psilocybin during The Good Fight’s second season. While Diane is microdosing, her sanity is questioned, but the show argues that her drug-influenced conduct is just as surreal as the administration she hates so much.
And yes, I’m fully aware of the nonsense setup that is Christine Baranski microdosing psychedelic mushrooms on a prestige legal drama. But I swear it’s real.
The Good Fight began its fourth season, which premiered April 8, by fiddling around with the comic book element of an alternate reality. In its hilariously taut premiere, Diane wakes up in a world where Hillary Clinton won the presidency, a scenario that should be a paradise for her.
But she slowly starts to realize that other events in this timeline mean that Harvey Weinstein was never punished, that the Clinton administration has cured cancer but has its own scandals, that her job requires her to curry favor with Supreme Court Justice Elizabeth Warren, and that the multiple famous men accused of masturbating into potted plants are still on the loose.
Since many of the bad people in this alt-timeline are Democrats, Diane’s job leads her to protect them, regardless of her disgust for their actions. In that moment, the show turns its own sardonic nature and political posturing onto itself.
Reality is restored at the end of the episode, and life continues (with Trump as president) for Diane and the rest of her cohort as they adjust to life having been acquired by a bigger, richer firm.
But the sly thing about Diane’s alternate-reality scenario is that a lot of the awful stuff that happened in it actually happened in real life to us, the viewers at home. Regardless of our political affiliation, it wasn’t a figment of deep, dark satire. And somehow, we’re still chugging along, dealing with another crisis (a Good Fight riff on the coronavirus can’t be far off).
But instead of giving us an assured and righteous pledge about brighter days ahead and a future worth fighting for, The Good Fight seems to recognize that at this point, we should maybe just get credit for not hitting Diane’s magic mushrooms.
And that, in itself, feels like its own kind of relief.
The Good Fight is streaming on CBS All Access, with new episodes of season four coming out on Wednesdays.


What day is it today?

Today is Wednesday , May 6 , 2020 , at least in the continental United States .
It is already Thursday , May 7 , in some parts of the world .
To some degree , time is an illusion .
We are bound by its forward passage , being the third-dimensional creatures we are , but the perceptions we have placed upon time have been invented .
Humans invented the year .
Humans invented the month .
Humans invented the day , the hour , the minute , the second .
These distinctions are not arbitrary — it really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Earth to orbit the sun — but their creation was not inevitable .
Our numerical system is likely base-10 because we have 10 fingers ; the way we understand time is almost entirely dependent on the fact that we evolved on this planet , circling this sun .
Time , at least as we understand it , is also a byproduct of capitalism .
In his seminal 1967 economic paper “ Work-Discipline and Industrial Capitalism , ” E. P. Thompson notes that in early human cultures , delineations of time were broad understandings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ went down , when the seasons changed .
But as industrialization became the norm , time became a mechanized system that no longer served those who ’ d invented it .
We increasingly served at the beck and call of time , for that is how those who possessed capital could best regulate those who performed the labor .
For we are now at a point where sociologists are discussing the “ problem ” of leisure .
And a part of the problem is : how did it come to be a problem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ convenience with industrial capitalism , was the agent which converted men to new valuations of time ; which taught children even in their infancy to improve each shining hour ; and which saturated men ’ s minds with the equation , time is money .
One recurrent form of revolt within Western industrial capitalism , whether bohemian or beatnik , has often taken the form of flouting the urgency of respectable timevalues .
And the interesting question arises : if Puritanism was a necessary part of the work-ethos which enabled the industrialized world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the past , will the Puritan valuation of time begin to decompose as the pressures of poverty relax ?
Is it decomposing already ?
Will men begin to lose that restless urgency , that desire to consume time purposively , which most people carry just as they carry a watch on their wrists ?
But it remains that on some base level , we will always understand time .
The sun comes up , the sun goes down .
Though we might be inside , where that process is more difficult to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ does not obscure the day and night cycle .
What is lost , as each day blends into the next , in vaguely similar ways , is the mechanistic definition of time , the capitalist definition of time , the industrial definition of time .
We do not know what day it is , but we do know when there is a new day .
To live inside is to lose distinction .
There is a numbing effect that occurs when each day is the same , when our schedules are subsumed by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ undifferentiated time .
And yet isn ’ t this how so many of the less privileged around the world , forced to work jobs involving menial labor , day after day after day , already live ?
Isn ’ t this why we invented the weekend ?
Has this quarantine simply shown to those of us with more economic privilege that our “ free time ” was always a mirage , which could disappear before our eyes , by giving us so much “ free ” time ?
I have a wall calendar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I need to orient myself in time , I look at it .
But even the usefulness of my calendar has started to fray around the edges .
I began writing this story because I couldn ’ t quite believe it was a Thursday , even as I knew it had to be a Thursday .
But it might as well not be .
A cycle that bears the sun across our sky until it sets in the west is a reality ; “ Thursday ” is an invention .
Is it still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I will update this article daily until we don ’ t need it anymore .
I hope there is a time when we know it is Thursday or Tuesday or June 17 without having to look at a calendar or ask each other or Google .
I hope there is a time when going outside to see the sun doesn ’ t feel like exposing yourself to toxic levels of radiation .
( I know I should be taking walks ; every time , I feel like I ’ m risking everything @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time in which all this “ free ” time no longer feels like a period we must exploit for maximum value .
I hope there is a time when I remember what it ’ s like to grab lunch with a friend , to watch dogs play in the surf , to breathe in the air and just be .
Until then , find a way to make time have meaning for you .
Read a long book .
Cook an elaborate meal .
Take up knitting .
Write an epic poem .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ always meant to get to .
Sleep .
Remember that time doesn ’ t own you , and that you own time .
This will be over someday , a part of the past .
It will someday be a memory .
Hang on to that .
I ’ ll see you outside again .
For now , it is Wednesday , May 6 , 2020 .
In some parts of the world , it is Thursday , May 7 , 2020 .
Are you a “ What day is it today ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ theme song .
It ’ s written by composer Laura Stratford , and it is wonderful .

Today is Wednesday, July 1, 2020, at least in the continental United States. It is already Thursday, July 2, 2020, in some parts of the world. Life isn’t resuming gracefully, but the herky jerky train wreck of America’s reopening certainly speaks to some desire to exit this quarantine period. And so “What Day Is It Today” will exit the stage, too. For now, at least.
To some degree, time is an illusion. We are bound by its forward passage, being the third-dimensional creatures we are, but the perceptions we have placed upon time have been invented. Humans invented the year. Humans invented the month. Humans invented the day, the hour, the minute, the second.
These distinctions are not arbitrary — it really does take about 365 days for the Earth to orbit the sun — but their creation was not inevitable. Our numerical system is likely base-10 because we have 10 fingers; the way we understand time is almost entirely dependent on the fact that we evolved on this planet, circling this sun.
Time, at least as we understand it, is also a byproduct of capitalism. In his seminal 1967 economic paper “Work-Discipline and Industrial Capitalism,” E. P. Thompson notes that in early human cultures, delineations of time were broad understandings of when the sun came up and went down, when the seasons changed. But as industrialization became the norm, time became a mechanized system that no longer served those who’d invented it. We increasingly served at the beck and call of time, for that is how those who possessed capital could best regulate those who performed the labor.
Thompson writes:
For we are now at a point where sociologists are discussing the “problem” of leisure. And a part of the problem is: how did it come to be a problem ? Puritanism, in its marriage of convenience with industrial capitalism, was the agent which converted men to new valuations of time; which taught children even in their infancy to improve each shining hour; and which saturated men’s minds with the equation, time is money. One recurrent form of revolt within Western industrial capitalism, whether bohemian or beatnik, has often taken the form of flouting the urgency of respectable timevalues. And the interesting question arises: if Puritanism was a necessary part of the work-ethos which enabled the industrialized world to break out of the poverty-stricken economies of the past, will the Puritan valuation of time begin to decompose as the pressures of poverty relax? Is it decomposing already? Will men begin to lose that restless urgency, that desire to consume time purposively, which most people carry just as they carry a watch on their wrists?
But it remains that on some base level, we will always understand time. The sun comes up, the sun goes down. Though we might be inside, where that process is more difficult to witness, the fact of our insideness does not obscure the day and night cycle. What is lost, as each day blends into the next, in vaguely similar ways, is the mechanistic definition of time, the capitalist definition of time, the industrial definition of time. We do not know what day it is, but we do know when there is a new day.
To live inside is to lose distinction. There is a numbing effect that occurs when each day is the same, when our schedules are subsumed by what feels like an endless gulf of undifferentiated time. And yet isn’t this how so many of the less privileged around the world, forced to work jobs involving menial labor, day after day after day, already live? Isn’t this why we invented the weekend? Has this quarantine simply shown to those of us with more economic privilege that our “free time” was always a mirage, which could disappear before our eyes, by giving us so much “free” time?
I have a wall calendar hanging above my desk, and when I need to orient myself in time, I look at it. But even the usefulness of my calendar has started to fray around the edges. I began writing this story because I couldn’t quite believe it was a Thursday, even as I knew it had to be a Thursday. But it might as well not be. A cycle that bears the sun across our sky until it sets in the west is a reality; “Thursday” is an invention. Is it still necessary? I don’t know.
What’s important to remember is that time doesn’t own you. You own time. This will be over someday, a part of the past. It will someday be a memory. Hang on to that. I’ll see you outside again.
This story was originally published Friday, March 27, 2020.
Are you a “What day is it today?” superfan? Check out our official theme song. It’s written by composer Laura Stratford, and it is wonderful.